Narcissism at Work : Personality Disorders of Corporate Leaders 978-3-319-60330-8, 3319603302, 978-3-319-60329-2

Citation preview

NARCISSISM AT WORK Personality Disorders of Corporate Leaders Marie-Line Germain

Narcissism at Work

Marie-Line Germain

Narcissism at Work Personality Disorders of Corporate Leaders

Marie-Line Germain Western Carolina University Asheville, NC, USA

ISBN 978-3-319-60329-2 ISBN 978-3-319-60330-8  (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8 Library of Congress Control Number: 2017944086 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: © nemesis2207/Fotolia.co.uk Printed on acid-free paper This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

To my paternal grandparents, Jeanne and René Germain. You were right: benevolence, loyalty, and honesty do pay off.

Contents

1 Introduction 1 Part I  Research Background and Definitions 2 Definition and Description (Traits and Skills) of Narcissistic Leaders 9 3 Assessment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) 25 4 Narcissism in Leadership and Management: A Research Summary 41 Part II  Understanding NPD Corporate Leaders 5 How NPD Leaders Perceive Themselves and Others 71

vii

viii  Contents

Part III Practice: Practical Solutions for Those Who Work with NPD Corporate Leaders 6 Considerations for HR, Consultants, and Organizational Psychologists 87 Part IV  Case Studies and Proposed Solutions 7 Case Studies and Practical Advice 121 8 Book Summary and Directions for Future Research 151 Appendix 169 Index 175

About

the

Author

Dr. Marie-Line Germain is a research, teaching, and service awardwinning Associate Professor of Human Resources and Leadership at Western Carolina University (part of the University of North Carolina System). Her Ph.D. is in Leadership with a specialization in human resource development. She has authored book chapters and two dozen research articles in refereed journals. Her research focuses on employee expertise, mental health in the workplace, and dysfunctional leadership behaviors. She has received several national research awards and competitive grants and holds multiple leadership roles at research and professional associations. In addition, she directs The HR Consulting Initiative, which provides pro bono human resources consulting nationwide. She has been a visiting scholar in Japan, South Korea, and Ghana, and has been a visiting professor in Finland. She has also been the recipient of a Fulbright specialist scholarship.

ix

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 The hierarchical structure of pathological narcissism

16

xi

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 1.3 Table 2.1

Google scholar publications by search term   2 MEDLINE publications by search term   2 ProQuest publications by search term   3 Brief description of axis II personality disorders—Cluster B personality disorders   20 Table 2.2 Behaviors of Narcissistic Leaders   21 Table 2.3 Interpersonal challenges associated with pathological narcissism   21 Table 3.1 NPI-16: 16-item pair measure of narcissism   31

xiii

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Abstract  Germain presents a much-needed summary of the research on personality disorders of corporate leaders, while offering practical advice for the people who work with them. Focusing on the behaviors of leaders with observable Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), the chapter strives to assist human resource (HR) professionals, managers, and employees in achieving a broad understanding of NPD, in order for employees to optimize relationships and advance their own careers. Keywords  Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) behaviors Work relationships · Career Inflated self-worth and a sense of entitlement have become pervasive in American youth (Twenge and Campbell 2009). Singers, actors, and other celebrities often express a highly exaggerated self-image, which may be perceived by youth as expected and desirable. The cult of celebrity can harm teenagers as they grow up in a world where being rich and famous is viewed as the highest achievement (Burgo 2015)—particularly when their parents expect them to be social winners. Celebrity worship encourages teens’ inherent narcissistic tendencies, offering an escape from their own shortcomings and, possibly, their own sense of shame. They come to associate fame with happiness and become convinced that those with talent, or perceived talent, will achieve success. Yet, narcissists © The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_1

1

2  M.-L. GERMAIN

are incapable of attaining and maintaining high professional goals unless they are focused, determined, hardworking, and gifted with charm. Narcissism continues to be studied in a variety of contexts, including clinical psychology, organizational and social psychology, and corporate management. The exponential number of articles published since 1980 in scholarly journals on the topic of personality disorders and their impact in the workplace reveals the increasing interest and prominence of study in this field. Table 1.1 shows the increase of research articles published in all medical journals combined from 1980 forward. In the past 36 years, articles related to the topic of narcissism increased by 75%, while those related to bullying show an increase of 1384%. Table 1.2 demonstrates a 101,000% increase in the number of research articles during that same 36-year period through the search engine MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Table 1.1  Google scholar publications by search term (Search results as of September 25, 2016) Years of publication

Search term Psychopathy Narcissism Personality disorder Bullying

1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–Sept 2016 Percentage increase 1980–2016

2930 5460 15,300 17,000 480%

14,000 23,100 30,900 24,500 75%

48,300 140,000 799,000 320,000 562%

5840 16,500 95,400 86,700 1384%

Table 1.2  MEDLINE publications by search term (Search results as of October 3, 2016) Years of publication

Search term Psychopathy Narcissism Personality disorder Bullying

1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–Sept 2016 Percentage increase 1980– 2016

145 217 760 1128 678%

705 468 484 641 −9%

9059 17,493 20,762 15,876 75%

3 101 858 3033 101,000%

1 INTRODUCTION 

3

Table 1.3  ProQuest publications by search term (Search results as of September 25, 2016) Years of publication

1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–Sept 2016 Percentage increase 1980–2016

Search term Psychopathy and workplace and employee 10 71 650 691 6810%

Narcissism and workplace and employee 126 859 2830 3158 2406%

Personality disorder and workplace and employee 476 5223 18,341 14,900 3030%

Bullying and workplace and employee 428 5021 28,817 46,309 10,719%

Online, or MEDLARS Online), a bibliographic database of life sciences and biomedical information. Table 1.3 shows the number of articles published in the abstract and index database ProQuest, which provides sources for researchers. From 1980 forward, the number of sources related to narcissism, specifically, has increased by 2406% and for the search term “personality disorders” by 3030%. This sharp increase in scholarly articles focused on narcissism mirrors the well-documented development of this personality disorder in Western cultures. Some have labeled narcissism a “modern epidemic,” pointing to the rapid change in society that occurred in industrial and post-industrial times as the cause (The Conversation 2016). The past three decades have witnessed a societal shift from a commitment to the collective to a focus on the individual or the self. The self-esteem movement was an important turning point in this. It determined that selfesteem was the key to success in life. Educators and parents began telling each child how special and unique he or she is, in order to make each feel more confident. Educators and parents moved to “confer” self-esteem upon their children, rather than letting them achieve it through hard work. The rise of individualism (with its focus on the self and one’s inner feelings) and the decline in social norms that accompanied the modernization of society mean that the community and the family are no

4  M.-L. GERMAIN

longer able to provide the same support for individuals as they once did. Research has shown that being embedded in social networks—such as being actively engaged in your community and connected with friends and family—has major health benefits. As the social fabric deteriorated, it became much harder to meet the basic need for meaningful connection. The question moved from “what is best for others” to “what is best for me.” The modernization of society seemingly prizes fame, wealth, and celebrity above all else. All this, combined with the breakdown in social ties created an “empty self, shorn of social meaning.” In addition, the increased use of social media, including Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, is further changing the way free time is spent and communication with others is pursued. Today, there are nearly 1.13 billion daily active Facebook users worldwide. Internet addiction is a new area of study in mental health, and recent cross-sectional research shows that addiction to Facebook is strongly linked to narcissistic behavior and low self-esteem (Malik and Khan 2015). While narcissism among young people is better researched, the impact narcissistic individuals have on a corporate organization, in general, and on their colleagues, in particular, is just beginning to be explored (Judge et al. 2006). Personality disorders, of which narcissism is one, can cause serious problems in interpersonal workplace relationships, including those with subordinates, co-workers, and supervisors (Ettner et al. 2011). Given the large number of narcissists at the helms of corporations today, the challenge facing organizations is to ensure that such leaders do not self-destruct or lead the company to disaster. Maccoby (2003) suggests that employees learn how to recognize—and work around— narcissistic bosses. He also recommends that organizations leverage their narcissistic leaders’ strengths while tempering their weaknesses. Most books on the topic of personality disorders focus on personal relationships with family and friends and offer coping mechanisms to some degree, but very few studies explore personality disorders as they impact the workplace. This book places specific emphasis on the clinical diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) among those who lead people and organizations. A summary of the current research is provided, followed by a discussion of overt and covert narcissistic characteristics, what psychometric measures are currently available to assess NPD, and its link to management.

1 INTRODUCTION 

5

Narcissism has been identified as a hallmark of many high-achieving, ambitious people (Yudofsky 2005), suggesting that such persons achieve greater career success. Their disorder is often not perceived as problematic until affected peers or subordinates voice concerns about distressing abnormalities they experience with such leaders. Working with a narcissistic leader can be taxing even for emotionally healthy individuals. Through manipulative, exploitative, and controlling behavior, a tendency to distort reality, and demonstrations of hostility, contempt, or rage, leaders with NPD may cause significant emotional harm to others. The needs of NPD leaders may deplete the energy of colleagues who, unaware of the disorder, are also ill-equipped to address it. Extreme narcissistic traits manifest in the devaluation of others, either subtly with condescension, or by criticism. These bullying behaviors lead to progressive erosion of direct reports’ self-esteem. A 2010 study by Hershcovis and Barling found that workplace bullying—a tactic often employed by leaders with NPD—such as belittling comments, persistent criticism of work, and withholding resources, appears to inflict more harm on employees than sexual harassment. As the authors put it, “As sexual harassment becomes less acceptable in society, organizations may be more attuned to supporting victims, who may therefore find it easier to cope. In contrast, non-violent forms of workplace aggression such as incivility and bullying are not illegal, leaving victims to fend for themselves.” From a total of 128 samples that were used, 46 included subjects who experienced sexual harassment, 86 experienced workplace aggression, and six experienced both. Sample sizes ranged from 1491 to 53,470 people, and participants ranged from 18 to 65 years of age. Despite their prevalence in high-level corporate leaders, personality disorders are rarely the subject of clinical studies because of the recurrent stigma and divide between business functions and employee psychology. Also, clinical psychologists and psychiatrists are held to professional standards that make them reluctant to diagnose personality disorders without administering a formal assessment. This book is based on the descriptions of behaviors of leaders with observable NPD as perceived by their co-workers. While some narcissistic leaders have shown to be organizational “saviors,” their behaviors can be equally damaging to those working with them. Organizational variables and culture can be affected, including worker motivation and well-being, turnover intention, productivity, and, ultimately, the organization’s bottom line.

6  M.-L. GERMAIN

Practical advice on how to handle these challenges is not readily available (Ettner et al. 2011). This book strives to assist Human Resource professionals, mid- and low-level managers, and employees in achieving a broad understanding of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. The practical part of the book provides advice for those who work with leaders who demonstrate NPD characteristics in the organizational setting, with the goal of optimizing relationships and advancing their own careers.

References Burgo, J. (2015). The narcissist you know: Defending yourself against extreme narcissists in an all-about-me age. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. Ettner, S. L., Maclean, J. C., & French, M. T. (2011). Does having a dysfunctional personality hurt your career? Axis II personality disorders and labor market outcomes. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 50(1), 149–173. Judge, T. A., Scott, B. A., & Ilies, R. (2006). Hostility, job attitudes, and workplace deviance: Test of a multilevel model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 126. Maccoby, M. (2003). The Productive Narcissist: The Promise and Peril of Visionary Leadership. New York, NY: Broadway Books. Malik, S., & Khan, M. (2015). Impact of Facebook addiction on narcissistic behavior and self-esteem among students. Journal of Pakistan Medical Association, 65(3), 260–263. The Conversation. (2016). Why are we becoming so narcissistic? Here is the science. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/why-are-we-becoming-sonarcissistic-heres-the-science-55773. Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2009). The narcissism epidemic: Living in the age of entitlement. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. Yudofsky, S. C. (2005). Fatal Flaws: Navigating Destructive Relationships with People with Disorders of Personality and Character. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.

PART I

Research Background and Definitions

CHAPTER 2

Definition and Description (Traits and Skills) of Narcissistic Leaders

Abstract  After describing the different clusters of personality disorders and their associated traits and behaviors, Germain details the differences between healthy and unhealthy narcissism, as well as clarifying the concepts of covert vs. overt narcissism. “Definition and Description of Narcissistic Leaders” then examines the role of racial and gender differences in narcissistic individuals. After presenting interpersonal challenges associated with pathological narcissism, Germain concludes by placing NPD in the workplace context. She does so by discussing how certain corporate leaders may present observable signs of NPD in the workplace, and how these signs may affect employees and organizations as a whole. Keywords  Traits and behaviors of NPD · Healthy vs. unhealthy narcissism Covert vs. overt narcissism · Interpersonal challenges · Pathological narcissism · NPD in the workplace

Background on Personality Disorders The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) offers specific diagnostic criteria to better define two broad classes of psychiatric disorders: Axis I (clinical disorders such as depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder) and Axis II (personality disorders [APA 2000]). To be diagnosed with a personality disorder (PD), an individual must display “an enduring pattern of inner experience and behavior that © The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_2

9

10  M.-L. GERMAIN

deviates markedly from the expectations of the individual’s culture” (APA 2000). Furthermore, the behavior patterns of the individual must be evident in at least two of the following mental activities: 1. Cognition (the way in which one perceives or interprets oneself, other people, and/or events) 2.  Affectivity (the range, intensity, liability, and appropriateness of one’s emotional responses) 3. Interpersonal functioning 4. Impulse control The pattern of behavior must also meet the following standards: • Be rigid and prevalent across a wide range of personal and/or social situations • Be stable and enduring, with the onset attributable to adolescence or, at the very least, early adulthood; cannot be a consequence of substance abuse, a medical condition, or another mental disorder • Results in clinically significant malaise or impairment regarding social, occupational, or other vital areas of functioning PDs are grouped in three clusters, identified as A, B, and C: • Cluster A includes a cognitive dimension (Paris 2003) and incorporates paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal personality disorders. Often, people with Cluster A disorders are regarded as being weird or eccentric, speaking or behaving in abnormal ways, exhibiting peculiar cognitions and ideas, and potentially struggling to relate to others (APA 2000). • Cluster B disorders, correlating to externalizing dimensions (Paris 2003), encompass antisocial, histrionic, borderline, and narcissistic personality disorders. In general, people who suffer from Cluster B disorders may demonstrate behavior that is overly emotional, dramatic, or erratic, and they will often act out with little regard for social norms. They struggle with impulsive behavior and are commonly hostile toward other people as well as engaging in self-abuse (APA 2000). • Cluster C disorders, correlating to internalizing dimensions (Paris 2003), include PDs that are avoidant, dependent, and obsessivecompulsive. Those who suffer from Cluster C disorders are likely to experience feelings of anxiety, extreme fear of social interactions, and generalized loss of control (APA 2000).

2  DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION (TRAITS AND SKILLS) … 

11

At som  e point over the course of his or her life, every individual is likely to display several of these traits; however, it is truly the severity and stability of a particular set of personality traits that define a diagnosable personality disorder. When it comes to the role that genetics and the early childhood environment play in the development of PDs, a multitude of conflicting theories and opinions exist. However, much of literature suggests that it is truly a convergence of “nature and nurture” (APA 2000; Yudofsky 2005). Basically, a child may be born with certain genetic predispositions to developing a PD; however, the child’s experiences and environment could ultimately determine whether and how that disorder plays out. For instance, children who possess specific temperaments that coincide with Cluster B disorders are more likely to develop a PD if their environment includes elements of abuse, neglect, or abandonment by their caregiver, deeming these children incapable of forming solid attachments with a parental figure (Karen 1998). The development of emotional empathy (and related neural capacities) is often determined by factors such as temperament and attachment styles. Prior to developing language, infants read and generate facial expressions as a means of communication (Leppänen and Nelson 2009). These emotional components rely on perceptual processing and emotion-based neural circuits and are often evident at birth. These components are crucial in preparing infants to connect empathetically and participate in effective interactions with others later in life. Fostering healthy and secure emotional attachments is a crucial aspect of infant development and depends largely on the primary caregiver’s empathetic abilities since the majority of an infant’s interactions involve the primary caregiver. Children who can develop secure attachment qualities tend to develop in ways that allow them to respond well to the needs of others (Mikulincer et al. 2003). Ronningstam (1998) deepens this understanding by stating, “The combination of a doting but emotionally depriving parent who delivers the message of specialness along with unrealistic expectations and a second non-doting parent who is absent, critical, entitled, cold, disengaging, or rejecting sets the stage for narcissistic personality disorder” (p. 247). Children who have been abandoned or suffer from abandonment issues are highly likely to develop a personality disorder; they are reported to be one of the most common groups of people who will develop narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) (Kernberg 1970; Rinsley 1967). Furthermore, children who were raised by abusive parents who

12  M.-L. GERMAIN

lacked parental warmth and struggled with perspective talking skills reported low levels of self-confidence and high frequency of narcissistic traits (Wiehe 2003). Abundant research and literature support the conclusion that individuals who develop personality disorders find it incredibly difficult to change and are inherently challenging to treat, mostly because they develop such disorders early in life and experience “lasting patterns of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about oneself and the environment.” These enduring patterns of inner experiences and behavior can lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other areas of functioning (APA 2000). Whereas Axis I disorders (such as depression and anxiety) are typically confined to a specific time period, personality disorders (Axis II) are generally expected to maintain a lifelong diagnosis. Although events occurring in an individual’s life may exacerbate behaviors typical of a personality disorder (e.g., divorce might trigger suicidal thoughts in a person plagued with borderline personality disorder), the characteristics of the disorder are inherently enduring. Individuals diagnosed with personality disorders are frequently linked to low levels of emotional and social functioning, with little improvement shown in the areas of psychosocial functioning, even over time (Skodol et al. 2005). While less concrete evidence exists to support the effect that personality disorders have on labor market performance, it is fairly easy to make a direct connection between the two.

Definition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), a Cluster B personality disorder, is highly regarded as one of the most difficult personality disorders to identify (Pies 2011). Thanks to great efforts made by psychoanalysts and psychoanalytical psychotherapists, the development of NPD as a diagnostic category offers a cluster for patients who did not previously fit into an established personality disorder category. These difficult-to-define patients generally do not exhibit signs of psychosis or neurosis and are often unresponsive to conventional psychotherapeutic treatment, making it very challenging to categorize them (Gildersleeve 2012). NPD commonly coexists with other psychiatric disorders, often resulting in patients who exhibit signs of anxiety or depression in addition to their narcissistic traits.

2  DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION (TRAITS AND SKILLS) … 

13

A fair number of patients who display characteristics of NPD when seeking psychiatric counsel also express traits associated with various other disorders and issues. A multitude of comorbid disorders are known to exist with NPD, the most prevalent being major depressive disorder, which is apparent in about 45–50% of NPD patients (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013; Payson 2002). Bipolar disorder appears in approximately 5–11% of NPD patients (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013). Obsessivecompulsive behaviors are frequently associated with NPD (Payson 2002). However, substance abuse is the most commonly seen comorbidity. Approximately 24–64.2% of NPD patients experience some form of a substance abuse disorder (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013). AttentionDeficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has also been connected to NPD (Payson 2002). Existing alongside NPD, these additional afflictions tend to aggravate and often cloak the disorder; however, when properly diagnosed and treated, these issues may potentially soften the traits of NPD. It is of the utmost importance to accurately identify and treat comorbid disorders to provide the best opportunity for change to occur. Although the public generally pays more attention to clinical disorders (such as depression and schizophrenia) rather than more obscure personality disorders, the latter may offer a deeper level of understanding regarding labor market outcomes. Although personality disorders often vary from atypical (e.g., antisocial PD, in severe cases sometimes referred to as “sociopathy”) to the less pathological (e.g., obsessive-compulsive disorder), all have the inherent potential to cause significant issues in interpersonal relationships, including those with supervisors, co-workers, and employees. While there is a plethora of characteristics that serve to define NPD, some of the most notable characteristics are lack of empathy, grandiosity, and seeking superfluous admiration (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013). One of the true defining qualities of an individual with NPD is a blatant lack of empathy, a signifier of the disorder highlighted in both the clinician’s and general public’s understanding of those with NPD. Lack of empathy often has negative impacts on an individual’s interpersonal relationships and quality of life. While NPD individuals may exude an impression of self-control, dismissal of others, and an overall condescending attitude, they are likely battling extraordinary low selfesteem and feelings of inadequacy internally. Typically, NPD individuals attain many personal and professional goals throughout their lives, though their achievements are generally tarnished

14  M.-L. GERMAIN

due to the negative effects that NPD has on personal and professional relationships. Largely, this is due to the individual with NPD being incapable of handling criticism in any form, while exhibiting little to no empathy or respect for the people in his or her life. Healthy vs. Unhealthy Narcissism Rather than regarding narcissism in all or nothing terms, Malkin (2015) suggests imagining a continuum (spectrum) from 0 to 10 that reflects given criteria for diagnosing NPD, as defined in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) (APA 2011). For example, the desire to “feel special” ranges from abstinence (1) to addiction (10). Living in constant extremes is generally viewed as being unhealthy, but finding a happy medium is often difficult for NPD individuals. For instance, individuals living at an extreme such as 0–1, likely will never feel special. They may turn down sympathy or assistance even when they need it the most due to believing they do not deserve any attention or help. While some degree of selflessness is considered admirable, unrelenting selflessness can be detrimental to one’s health. The opposite end of the spectrum features individuals living at a 10— those who wish to live in the spotlight consistently, no matter the cost. These individuals live with the mindset that if others are not acknowledging their importance, then they simply cease to exist. Essentially, people at this end of the spectrum are addicted to any kind of attention and will go to great lengths to satisfy their addiction (Malkin 2015). Consider someone living at a 9 on the spectrum; this level is still considered dark narcissism. While these individuals may not need to elbow their way into the spotlight to feel whole, they certainly would if given the opportunity. People living at a 1 tend to suffer just as much as those at a 9 or 10, though in quite opposite ways. Any minute amount of attention that they are given, say for instance on a birthday or special occasion, is simply more than they can tolerate. At the 2, 3, 7, and 8 marks, people’s feelings are generally more flexible and open to change. Presumably, the healthiest range is in the center, between 4 and 6. Although those who exist in this healthy range certainly experience intense ambition or occasional arrogance, feeling special or receiving attention is neither compulsive nor uncomfortable. For instance, a 6 would be considered healthy

2  DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION (TRAITS AND SKILLS) … 

15

narcissism where one oscillates between self-absorption and attentiveness. Individuals who live in the 5 range tend to be equally comfortable and modest about their need to be in the spotlight. While they undeniably enjoy success, their life does not revolve around constant achievement. As Malkin (2015) postulates, most models of human behavior consider flexibility to be the hallmark of mental health. Healthy humans have the innate ability to adapt behaviors and feelings based on their current circumstances. Conversely, in narcissism, one lives in a constant state of extremes, generally fixed at one end of the spectrum with an inability to fluctuate. However, life events tend to affect the position of an NPD individual (up or down) on the spectrum by a few points, with an unusual circumstance pushing them to reach one extreme or the other. Divorce and illness may increase narcissistic tendencies as individuals attempt to salvage their self-worth. Teenagers, who often display a know-it-all attitude, have a propensity for behaving more narcissistically, as they are generally more prone to despair, anguish, and humiliation than adults. The teenage years are considered an essential part of identity development and the exhibited behaviors are not typically permanent; they dissipate during young adulthood as individuals become more attuned to the people around them. Overt or Covert NPD While some researchers make a clear distinction between overt and covert narcissism, Pincus (2013) suggests that overt expressions of narcissism are often incorrectly associated with grandiosity while covert expressions of narcissism are associated with vulnerability. Essentially, pathological narcissism is demonstrated by both grandiosity and vulnerability, each having an overt and a covert manifestation (Fig. 2.1). Pincus claims that this notion regarding overt and covert narcissism is largely inaccurate in that the phenotypes are not wholly distinct. NPD criteria along with self-reported items and interviews include a mix of overt expressions (behaviors, emotions, expressed attitudes) and covert expressions (private feelings, cognitions, needs, or motives) (McGlashan et al. 2005; Pincus 2013). No factual evidence exists justifying the actuality of overt and covert narcissism, with distinguishing between overt and covert expressions of narcissism coming secondary

16  M.-L. GERMAIN

Fig. 2.1  The hierarchical structure of pathological narcissism

to phenotypic variations seen via grandeur and culpability (Pincus and Lukowitsky 2010). An overt NPD leader is someone whose identity allows for a more open expression of narcissistic needs such as power, admiration, or control (Payson 2002). The overt NPD leader may be a power broker, using developed skills to advance in public endeavors, such as in an executive position or as a politician. In the public arena, the overt NPD leader gains attention by exuding charm, executing intimidation tactics, or expressing grandiosity by other means such as showcasing acquired money. The overt NPD leader uses a strong persona to steal the spotlight and demand the public’s attention, admiration, awe, respect, or fear. Socially, these NPD leaders believe their audience enjoys their personality and is impressed with their power, money, and physical or intellectual prowess. While often initially drawn to an NPD leader’s charisma, an audience will soon develop a better understanding of the dynamic that they have entered. The NPD leader will demand constant admiration and support and, while appearing to have friends, are likely surrounding themselves only with people who offer admiration and are willing to play a supporting role—often for their own personal gain. Friendships such as these are generally superficial and require minimal emotional investment from the NPD leader. By comparison, the covert NPD leader gains power, admiration, status, and control by indirect means. These individuals are generally more self-contained or may even be viewed as aloof. They will disguise their grandiose needs by taking on the role of a helper, doctor, pastor, humanitarian, do-gooder, expert professional, hermit, or even a misunderstood artist (Payson 2002). This assumed persona allows the covert NPD leader to gain attention, status, and power through deeds or connections, rather than taking on a solo role in the spotlight. In fact, he

2  DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION (TRAITS AND SKILLS) … 

17

or she may shy away from the spotlight, for example, talking at length about connections to important people and promising introductions to others. The covert NPD leader’s feeling of pride and self-importance generally has little to do with a genuine ability to empathize with the feelings and needs of others and is gained more from his or her selfimposed humanitarian status. Similar to the overt NPD leader, the covert NPD leader has an inability to empathize but disguises a narcissistic need for attention with a demeanor of worry, fretting, and overprotection. Also like the overt NPD, the covert NPD leader’s hidden traits will eventually surface as relationships with others deepen. Whether overt or covert, the internal traits that NPD leaders display are largely the same: only the public, outer persona varies. The intensity of narcissism can vary from mild to extreme, but in almost all cases, the NPD leader puts his or her employees in a “giving” position. The first indication that NPD exists may become evident when an employee either becomes assertive or declines a request made by the NPD leader. Because the NPD leader has already established power and control within the relationship, the employee will likely feel impotent. Gender and Race Breakdown For reasons largely unknown, NPD tends to be more prominent among males than females. A 2008 epidemiologic survey of over 34,000 US adults, found that the overall prevalence of lifetime NPD was 6.2%, with rates greater for men (7.7%) than for women (4.8%) (Stinson et al. 2008; Farnsworth and Ella 2015). With only a handful of clinical or epidemiologic studies having been performed to explore the relationship between race-ethnicity and NPD, there is a glaring absence of pertinent data (Chavara et al. 2003), considering the fundamental degree to which culture and personality are entwined (Stinson et al. 2008). For instance, in a study done by Black et al. (1993), NPD was decidedly more ubiquitous among black men and women, younger adults, Hispanic women, and those widowed/ divorced/separated or who had never been married. Studies such as this pay tribute to the potential codependence that exists between ethnicity and personality.

18  M.-L. GERMAIN

Personality Disorders in the Workplace By definition, leaders are expected to exhibit characteristics that exceed those of other employees. After all, not everyone is elected VicePresident or CEO of a Fortune 500 company. A true leader must demonstrate unique qualities to reach such powerful levels—qualities that go beyond general experience, problem-solving skills, knowledge, or simply being an expert within a particular domain (Germain 2008). Leadership is not only about demonstrating powerful qualities but also, as Northouse (2007, p. 12) suggests, “leadership is an influence process that assists groups of individuals towards goal attainment.” Popular in the 1940s, the leadership trait theory included physical and social skills as well as unique personality traits and abilities. These are reflected in Germain’s (2006) self-enhancement items of perceived expertise. Similar to experts, leaders are a “special kind of people” who often possess the gift to accomplish extraordinary things. The true difference between leaders and non-leaders lies in the special traits that leaders inherently maintain. According to Jung, successful leaders must reflect an archetypal image (Schwartz-Salant 2015). In Western culture, leaders are expected to project energy and confidence, with an occasional display of toughness. Some degree of healthy narcissistic traits can be advantageous in organizational leaders, though only when these traits are inwardly identified rather than reflective of pathological narcissism. As defined earlier, narcissism as a personality disorder is characterized by high self-regard and an innate desire for personal aggrandizement (Pinto and Patanakul 2015). Based on this, a psychiatrist is likely to witness as much psychopathology at office parties, conferences, and within organizations as in their own office. Family members, friends, business partners, and co-workers of individuals with personality disorders often experience great levels of distress and frustration (Jackson and Burgess 2000; Miller et al. 2007). While each personality disorder is specifically defined by different symptoms and behaviors, personality disorders in general all feature some form of maladaptive coping mechanisms that tend to negatively affect interpersonal and work relationships (The Merck Manuals Online Medical Library 2007). For example, while most people tend to project unpleasant emotions or thoughts onto others, those suffering from NPD often project with

2  DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION (TRAITS AND SKILLS) … 

19

greater intensity. Disordered individuals may engage in externalization of blame in which others are faulted for problems that the disordered individual caused (Campbell et al. 2005). They are capable of distorting facts to their advantage and may also struggle when it comes to offering praise to subordinates, often resorting to controlling or manipulative behavior, becoming deceptive and vengeful, and ultimately leading to interpersonal problems both on and off the job. Because of their excessively competitive nature and willingness to exploit co-workers, narcissistic leaders might achieve great professional success, but it is almost always at the expense of others. The breadth of impairment that leaders with personality disorders may cause in the workplace is significant and often results in not only the decline of labor market success for the disordered individual but also in the diminishment of the productivity of co-workers. In general, narcissists do not handle criticism well, often lashing out, engaging in heated arguments, or invoking chilling detachment strategies. Narcissists are often quick to offer judgment, ridicule, criticism, and blame while at the same time refusing to reach any kind of solution to problematic situations. Corporate leaders who exhibit these particular behaviors often instigate a multitude of issues within the workplace, from risky decision-making to troublesome relationships with colleagues (Tables 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3). As will be developed in upcoming chapters, the NPD leader’s ego is fragile and great lengths will be taken to boost it. Essentially, NPD leaders are predominantly self-serving individuals who deceive others into making unreasonable sacrifices. These behaviors are not only self-destructive, but also serve to destroy the NPD leader’s home, work environments, and relationships. As Paramhansa Yogananda (2003) suggests, “Some people try to be tall by cutting off the heads of others” (p. 132). Personality disorders of any domain are challenging to understand, even to the seasoned psychotherapist (Payson 2002). NPD individuals are an elusive and complex breed, skilled at projecting charm and creating the illusion of control and competence, especially in the public eye. Only the people closest to NPD individuals, who are likely unaware of their own deep-seated issues, will be able to see the disturbing and volatile traits of this disorder that lay beneath the surface.

20  M.-L. GERMAIN Table 2.1  Brief description of axis II personality disorders—Cluster B personality disorders Narcissistic • Demonstrates grandiosity, immodesty, and unrealistic self-perception • Requires constant approval/admiration; overly concerned with success and hypersensitive to criticism • Displays utter lack of empathy, incapable of seeing others’ point of view • Extreme sense of entitlement and envious nature • Propensity to be exploitative (with a lesser degree of deliberate intent often seen in those with antisocial personality disorder) Borderline • Experiences profound emotional and interpersonal instability; exhibits rapid mood swings, including displays of inappropriate and intense anger • Possesses deep fear of abandonment, strong reaction to separations • Involved in troubled relationships with frequent verbal outbursts; rapid switching between idealizing and devaluing others • Shaky self-image and lack of self-identity, both resulting in rapid and frequent changes in opinions or plans about career, sexual identity, values, and friends • Perpetually inconsistent and impulsive, lacks clear goals or direction, performs poorly in work/school situations without proper structure • Can be self-destructive by undermining themselves, often when goals are soon to be met Antisocial • Lacks a superego or conscience, unable to follow societal rules • No regard for moral or legal standards, willingness to lie, potentially violent, commonly has a criminal record • Acts carelessly, irresponsibly, or impetuously • Ability to feign charm though realistically struggles to get along with others • Displays aggressive behavior, shows no remorse, takes pleasure in humiliating others Histrionic • Exhibits exaggerated emotional reactions in everyday situations • Overly dramatic, constantly seeks attention, showcases vanity • Engages in demanding and manipulative behaviors, frequently throws tantrums, requires constant stimulation • Sexually provocative, wishes to be the center of attention

2  DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION (TRAITS AND SKILLS) … 

21

Table 2.2  Behaviors of Narcissistic Leaders Behaviors

Description

Abuse of power

Serve personal goals, to reinforce self image, conceal inadequacies, enhance perception of performance (Benson and Hogan 2008) Bullying, coercion, damage of psychological well-being of others, inconsistent treatment of subordinates (Asland et al. 2008) Perfectionism, limit subordinate initiatives (Benson and Hogan 2008) Engage in corrupt, unethical and sometimes illegal behaviors (Lipman-Blumen 2005)

Inflicts damage on others

Controls to meet personal needs Breaks rules to serve herself Self-admiration, self-aggrandizement, and see others as an extension of herself

Table 2.3  Interpersonal challenges associated with pathological narcissism Trait

Specific behavior

Grandiosity

Dominance, Superiority, Arrogance, Authority, Vindictive, Intrusive, (I like to be the center of attention; I am better than others) Vulnerability Coldness, Social avoidance, Exploitative, Entitlement (I demand respect), Intolerant of criticism, Unwilling to compromise, Lack of empathy, Poor listener

References American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental health disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). American Psychiatric Association. (2011). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. Text Revision (DSM-V-TR). Aasland, M. S., Skogstad, A., & Einarsen, S. (2008). The dark side: Defining destructive leadership behavior. Organisations and People, 15(3), 19–26. Benson, M. J., & Hogan, R. S. (2008). How dark side leadership personality destroys trust and degrades organisational effectiveness. Organisations and People, 15(3), 10–18. Black, D. W., Noyes, R., Jr., Pfohl, B., Goldstein, R. B., & Blum, N. (1993). Personality disorder in obsessive-compulsive volunteers, well comparison

22  M.-L. GERMAIN subjects, and their first-degree relatives. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150(8), 1226–1232. Campbell, W. K., Bush, C. P., Brunell, A. B., & Shelton, J. (2005). Understanding the social costs of narcissism: The case of the tragedy of the commons. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1358–1368. Chavira, D. A., Grilo, C. M., Shea, M. T., Yen, S., Gunderson, J. G., Morey, L. C., …, Mcglashan, T. H. (2003). Ethnicity and four personality disorders. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 44(6), 483–491. Farnsworth, & Ella (2015). The Legal Consequences of Hiring Narcissists. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/pages/0515-narcissistic-personality-disorder.aspx. Germain, M. L. (2006). Development and preliminary validation of a psychometric measure of expertise: The Generalized Expertise Measure (GEM) (Unpublished dissertation). Barry University, Miami, FL. Germain, M. L. (2008). Traits and skills theories as the Nexus between leadership and expertise: Reality or fallacy? In Academy of Human Resource Development Proceedings. Gildersleeve, M. (2012). Demystifying paradoxical characteristics of narcissistic personality disorder. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 34(4), 403– 404. Retrieved from http://www.ijpm.info/article.asp?issn=0253-7176;year =2012;volume=34;issue=4;spage=403;epage=404;aulast=Gildersleeve. Jackson, H. J., & Burgess, P. M. (2000). Personality disorders in the community: A report from the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 35(12), 531–538. Karen, R. (1998). Becoming attached: First relationships and how they shape our capacity to love. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Kernberg, O. F. (1970). Factors in the treatment of narcissistic personality disorder. Journal of American Psychoanalytical Association, 18, 51–58. Leppänen, J. M., & Nelson, C. A. (2009). Tuning the developing brain to social signals of emotions. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(1), 37–47. Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). Toxic leadership: When grand illusions masquerade as noble visions. Leader to Leader, 2005(36), 29–36. McGlashan, T. H., Grilo, C. M., Sanislow, C. A., Ralevski, E., Morey, L. C., Gunderson, J. G., …, Stout, R. L. (2005). Two-year prevalence and stability of individual DSM-IV criteria for schizotypal, borderline, avoidant, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders: Toward a hybrid model of axis II disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162(5), 883–889. Malkin, C. (2015). Rethinking narcissism. In The bad- and surprisingly goodabout feeling special. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Pereg, D. (2003). Attachment theory and affect regulation: The dynamics, development, and cognitive consequences of attachment-related strategies. Motivation and Emotion, 27(2), 77–102.

2  DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION (TRAITS AND SKILLS) … 

23

Miller J. D., Campbell, K, W., & Pilkonis, P. A. (2007). Narcissistic personality disorder: Relations with distress and functional impairment. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 48(2),170–177. Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Paris, J. (2003). Personality disorders over time: Precursors, course, and outcome. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17(6), 479–488. Payson, E. D. (2002). The Wizard of Oz and other narcissists: Coping with the oneway relationship in work, love, and family. Julian Day Publications. Pies, R. (2011, Febraury). How to eliminate narcissism overnight. Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience, 8(2), 23–27. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3071092/. Pincus, A. L. (2013). The pathological narcissism inventory. In J.S. Ogrodniczuk, (Ed.), Understanding and treating pathological narcissism. American Psychological Association. Pincus, A. L., & Lukowitsky, M. R. (2010). Pathological narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 421–446. Pinto, J. K., & Patanakul, P. (2015). When narcissism drives project champions: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1180–1190. Rinsley, D. B. (1967). The adolescent in residential treatment. Some critical reflections. Adolescence, 2(5), 83. Ronningstam, E. F. (1998). Disorders of narcissism: Diagnostic, clinical, and empirical implications (pp. 29–51). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press. Ronningstam, E. F., & Weinberg, I. (2013, Spring). Narcissistic personality disorder: Progress in recognition and treatment. The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry, XI(2), 167–177. Retrieved from http://focus.psychiatryonline. org/data/Journals/FOCUS/926935/167.pdf. Schwartz-Salant, N. (2015). Healthy presidential narcissism. Is that possible? In S. Buser & L. Cruz (Eds.), A clear and present danger: Narcissism in the era of Donald Trump. Asheville, NC: Chiron Publications. Skodol, A. E., Pagano, M. E., Bender, D. S., Shea, M. T., Gunderson, J. G., Yen, S., …, Zanarini, M. C. (2005). Stability of functional impairment in patients with schizotypal, borderline, avoidant, or obsessive–compulsive personality disorder over two years. Psychological Medicine, 35(3), 443–451. Stinson, F. S., Dawson, D. A., Goldstein, R. B., Chou, S. P., Huang, B., Smith, S. M., …, Grant, B. F. (2008). Prevalence, correlates, disability, and comorbidity of DSM-IV narcissistic personality disorder: Results from the wave 2 national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 69(7),1033. The Merck Manuals Online Medical Library Personality Disorders. (2007). Last full review/revision September 2007 by John G. Gunderson, MD. Retrieved from http://www.merck.com/mmpe/sec15/ch201/ch201a.html.

24  M.-L. GERMAIN Wiehe, V. R. (2003). Empathy and narcissism in a sample of child abuse perpetrators and a comparison sample of foster parents. Child Abuse and Neglect, 27(5), 541–555. Yogananda, P. (2003). Autobiography of a yogi. Sterling. Yudofsky, S. C. (2005). Fatal flaws: Navigating destructive relationships with people with disorders of personality and character. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric.

CHAPTER 3

Assessment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD)

Abstract  In “Assessment of Narcissistic Personality Disorder,” Germain focuses on the practical nature of observing narcissistic behaviors in the workplace. After outlining how NPD has been defined in different versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the chapter navigates through common clinical measures of NPD and their limitations. Germain concludes by presenting legal concerns about assessing personality disorders in the workplace and examines narcissistic individuals’ ability to fake psychometric tests. Keywords  Assessment of NPD in the workplace Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) Clinical measures of NPD · Psychometric tests · Legal concerns

Clinical Measures of Narcissistic Personality Disorder Although narcissism has been widely studied within the realms of psychology since the 1800s (Ellis 1988), it is only within the past few decades that its relationship to the concept of leadership has been pursued (Kets de Vries 1993). Increased interest in topics related to corporate leadership failures—often associated with a decline in organizational performance—has fostered speculation, both in the media and in academic research, regarding narcissism among those in leadership. However, very few empirical research © The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_3

25

26  M.-L. GERMAIN

studies within organizational contexts have been published, with the majority being case-based, thus limiting the possibility to generalize findings. As Pinto and Patanakul (2015) pointed out, the practical nature of observing narcissistic behavior in the workplace is daunting. Behaviorists typically use two approaches: laboratory research in non-business settings (employing respondents such as students) or grounded research that is based on case studies. Although the latter is often appealing due to its natural setting, applying logical assumptions to the narcissist’s strict cause and effect actions can be challenging. NPD in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) Typically, researchers define narcissism by referring to diagnostic criteria for NPD as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5 2011; APA 2000). The DSM has long been the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the USA since the 1950s. The DSM is intended for use by clinicians of different theoretical orientations in all clinical settings. NPD was first introduced into the official diagnostic system in the third edition of the DSM (APA 1980, 1987). Based on the summary of literature prior to 1978, a committee of psychiatrists and psychologists developed the DSM-III definition and criteria for NPD. The criteria represented amalgamations of the theoretical and clinical work by Kernberg (1975, 1984), Kohut (1971, 1977), and Millon, as well as that gleaned from other authorities on narcissism (Frances 1980; Levy et al. 2013). As early as 1978, the DSM-III criteria for NPD included the following descriptors: 1. A grandiose sense of self-importance and uniqueness 2. A preoccupation with fantasies involving unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love 3. Exhibitionism (seeking constant attention and admiration) 4. A cold indifference (to others) and/or blatant expressions of rage, inferiority, shame, humiliation, or emptiness when responding to criticism or defeat. At least two of the following disturbances in interpersonal relationships were required to diagnose Narcissistic Personality Disorder:

3  ASSESSMENT OF NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER (NPD) 

27

1. Entitlement (expectation of special favors) 2. Exploiting of a relationship 3. Alternating between extreme over-idealization and extreme devaluation of a relationship 4. Lack of empathy. To differentiate NPD from other disorders with which it showed high comorbidity (Cain et al. 2008), changes were made to the criteria of NPD in DSM-IV (1994). One of the most significant changes was the elimination of criteria regarding negative reactions to criticism, as it did not adequately differentiate NPD from paranoid and borderline personality disorders. The DSM-IV criteria for NPD included the following descriptors: 1. A grandiose sense of self-importance 2. A preoccupation with fantasies involving unlimited power, success, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love 3. Belief that oneself is uniquely “special” and should only associate with (and is only understood by) other “special” people or institutions 4. A need for excessive admiration 5. A sense of entitlement 6. Exploiting of relationships 7. Lack of empathy for others 8. Envious of others and/or a belief that others are envious of oneself 9. Display of arrogant and haughty behaviors or attitudes. These descriptors were further refined in DSM-5 (2011), where the essential features of a personality disorder are described as impaired personality functioning (self and interpersonal) in addition to the presence of pathological personality traits. Per the refined version of the DSM-5, in order to diagnose NPD, the following criteria must be met: A. Significant impairments in personality functioning: 1. Impairments in self-functioning (a or b): a.  Identity: Constantly seeking self-definition and regulation of self-esteem by turning to others; extravagant appraisal of self (inflated or deflated); alternating between extremes with emotional regulation reflected in variations of self-esteem.

28  M.-L. GERMAIN

b.  Self-direction: Setting goals are based on the approval of others; personal standards are either excessively inflated in order to view oneself as exceptional, or too low, based on an innate sense of entitlement; one is often oblivious to personal motivations. 2. Impairments in interpersonal functioning (a or b): a. Empathy: Fractured ability to recognize or identify the emotional state and/or needs of others; excessive attention given to reactions from others (only if reactions are perceived as being self-relevant); overestimation or underestimation of the effect that one has on other people. b.  Intimacy: Relationships tend to be highly superficial and solely exist to regulate self-esteem; little to no interest in the experiences of others; relationships controlled by the desire for personal gain. B. Pathological personality traits in the following domain: 1. Antagonism characterized by: a. Grandiosity: Feelings of entitlement, either overt or covert; expressions of self-centeredness; firmly believing that one is significantly superior to others; condescending attitude toward others. b. Attention seeking: Excessive attempts to gain attention and focus from others; persistently seeking admiration. Aside from simply expressing the above-mentioned personality traits, these impairments in personality functioning must be observed with relative stability and consistency across time and throughout various situations. Furthermore, personality traits such as these must not be regarded as standardizing for the individual’s socio-cultural environment or developmental stage, in addition to not being solely resultant of the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., medication or drug abuse) or a generalized, medically based condition (e.g., severe head trauma). In addition to evaluating the domains of impairment in personality functioning and pathological personality traits, the DSM-5 criteria includes an assessment of severity that strives to place the pathology on a spectrum (a continuum) ranging from healthy (no impairment or

3  ASSESSMENT OF NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER (NPD) 

29

mild impairment) to pathological (moderate to severe impairment). The degree of impairment observed in both self (i.e., identity and selfdirection) and interpersonal (i.e., empathy and intimacy) functioning can be assessed by utilizing the Levels of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) (APA 2011). In addition to evaluating the pathology of an NPD individual’s personality on a spectrum ranging from high functioning to severely disturbed, this assessment aims to focus on internal dimensions of functioning as opposed to previous scales, which focused largely on external functioning. This distinction is important in evaluating NPD because individuals with NPD often achieve significant professional success by acquiring a high status in fields such as politics, sports, or business. However, these successes often bear malignant features that are characterized by deficits in empathy and the ability to relate to others. In essence, narcissism vacillates between two states: grandiosity and vulnerability (Levy et al. 2013). Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI-40 and NPI-16) Non-clinician researchers measure narcissism using a variety of psychometric instruments; the most widely used is the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Ames et al. 2006; Raskin and Hall 1979). This inventory consists of paired, forced-choice statements in which NPD individuals are more likely to intensely associate with one option over the other. For example, one NPI item pairs “I like to be the center of attention” with “I prefer to blend in with the crowd.” Based on the original DSM-II behavioral criteria (Pinto and Patanakul 2015), the NPI offered additional testing and instrument modification, leading to the identification of the following four dimensions of narcissistic behavior (Emmons 1984): 1. Exploitive behavior/sense of entitlement (i.e., “Respect is owed to me.”) 2. Self-imposed roles of leadership/authority (i.e., “I need to be the center of attention.”) 3. Expressing superiority/arrogance (i.e., “I am better than others.”) 4. Extreme self-absorption/self-admiration (i.e., “I am preoccupied with how extraordinary and special I am.”).

30  M.-L. GERMAIN

Further analysis suggested that the above dimensions unite as a single, multi-dimensional construct, supporting the idea that as a personality characteristic, narcissism has both cognitive and motivational elements (Chatterjee and Hambrick 2007). The NPI-40 consists of 40 paired questions and is typically administered in a non-clinical setting. It was developed by Raskin and Terry in 1988 and measures the following factors: authority, superiority, exhibitionism, entitlement, vanity, exploitativeness, and self-sufficiency. Because the test measures sub-clinical narcissism, scoring high on the test does not mean that a person suffers from NPD but rather shows qualities that fit the spectrum. Although this instrument captures a range of different facets regarding construct, its length prohibits using it in settings where time pressure and respondent fatigue are major concerns (Ames et al. 2006). The short version of the NPI-40, the NPI-16 item form, is also psychometrically robust (Ames et al. 2006). The NPI-16, developed by Ames, Rose, and Anderson in 2006, has shown internal, discriminant, and predictive validity. It can serve as an alternative sub-clinical measure of narcissism in circumstances where the need for a shorter assessment exists. It focuses on 16 pair items taken from the NPI-40 that are most closely related to narcissism measures, thus providing a shortened but valid predictor of NPD. Table 3.1 presents the NPI-16 scale items. In five studies, Ames et al. (2006) show that the NPI-16 closely parallels the NPI-40 in its relation to other personality measures and dependent variables. Due to its notable face as well as internal, discriminant, and predictive validity, the NPI16 offers an alternative measure of narcissism when situations, such as in a workplace setting, do not allow for longer inventories. Bold Scale of the Hogan Development Survey (HDS-Bold) The Bold Scale of the Hogan Development Survey (HDS-Bold; Hogan and Hogan 2009) consists of 14 ambiguous and dichotomous items that are often embedded within a longer measure of personality; for example, “If I were in charge, I could get this country moving again.” HDS-Bold, while less commonly used to measure narcissism than the NPI, has been thoroughly validated (Hogan and Hogan 2009) and is frequently used in academic research (e.g., Benson and Campbell 2007; Harms et al. 2011).

3  ASSESSMENT OF NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER (NPD) 

31

Table 3.1  NPI-16: 16-item pair measure of narcissism (Ames et al. 2006) Narcissistic response

Non-Narcissistic response

I know that I am good because everybody keeps telling me so I like to be the center of attention I think I am a special person I like to have authority over people I find it easy to manipulate people I insist upon getting the respect that I feel is due to me I am apt to show-off when given the chance I always know what I am doing

When people compliment me, I sometimes get embarrassed I prefer to blend in with the crowd I am no better or worse than most people I don’t mind following orders I don’t take pleasure in manipulating others I usually get the respect that I feel I deserve

Everybody likes to hear my stories I expect a great deal from other people I really like to be the center of attention People always seem to recognize my authority I am going to be a great person I can make anybody believe anything that I want them to I am more capable than other people I am an extraordinary person

I try not to be a show-off Sometimes I am unsure of myself, or what I am doing Sometimes I tell good stories I like to do things for other people It makes me uncomfortable to be the center of attention Being an authority figure doesn’t mean that much to me I hope I am going to be successful People sometimes believe what I tell them There is a lot that I can learn from other people I am very much like everybody else

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) The MMPI, developed in 1943, is the most widely used personality and psychopathology assessment in the mental health field. It is used for diagnosis and for legal assessments, as well as for screening job candidates for pathological traits or conditions. It has been revised several times since its creation and a version specific to adolescents was developed. The test measures the following traits: Hypochondriasis, Depression, Hysteria, Psychopathic Deviate, Masculinity/Femininity, Paranoia, Psychasthenia, Schizophrenia, Hypomania, and Social Introversion. It has been translated into 22 different languages. The NPI, the CPI Narcissism Scale, and the HDS-Bold were all developed with the goal of defining narcissism within non-pathological communities, utilizing self-reporting instruments.

32  M.-L. GERMAIN

Accompanying the three aforementioned narcissism inventories that are commonly used, researchers may employ historiometric measures of narcissism. Publicly available information theorized to be indicative of narcissism assisted in concluding that historiometric measures of narcissism are distinctively archival. Prior research has utilized these measures by evaluating a variety of items: as examples, the cash compensation of a CEO compared to that of the second-highest paid executive in a given firm, the prominence of a CEO’s photograph within a company’s annual report, or the rating of a CEO’s level of narcissism based on undergraduate ratings as well as a biographical sketch created by the study’s authors (e.g., Chatterjee and Hambrick 2007, 2011; Resick et al. 2009). While these methods offer both innovative and resourceful solutions for assessing populations that tend to be hard to sample, it is likely that this approach will lead to larger effect sizes than studies where traditionally authenticated and inventory-based assessments are employed. Since researchers often control the idiosyncratic creation of these historiometric measures of narcissism, as well as the leadership effectiveness measures within the same dataset, an unintentional bias that favors expected results is often created. Assessment Limitations Furthermore, as Guenole (2014) and other researchers suggest, assessing for a predisposition to personality disorders presents several challenges when used within the workplace setting. First, the use of personality disorder inventories within the workplace potentially infringes upon the rights of employees as protected by law. Second, concerns regarding social responsibility exist in relation to inadvertent and unnecessary exclusion of candidates with mental health problems from the workplace. Third, concerns exist regarding the possibility for test takers to forge false results with personality disorder inventories. The multitude of challenges that exist for administering surveys within organizations is well recognized. Often, administering surveys on sensitive topics such as narcissism generates low response rates (Cycyota and Harrison 2006) much because individuals occupying high-ranking positions within an organization possess behaviors that often cause a reluctance to participate in data collection. This reluctance generates a need for alternative and creative methods for evaluating narcissism.

3  ASSESSMENT OF NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER (NPD) 

33

O’Reilly et al. (2014) used an alternative approach by sampling employees from 32 firms in order to broaden viewpoints regarding the degree of narcissism expressed by their chief executive. Respondents were presented with a specific group of descriptive adjectives (based on NPI instrument items) and were directed to rank their CEOs based on how they perceived the CEO’s behavior aligned with the given adjectives. Alternatively, researchers such as Resick et al. (2009) have taken a less-direct approach to identifying narcissism, such as utilizing visual or written cues or compensation information. In efforts to unobtrusively identify NPD individuals, researchers have employed methods such as analyzing word usage (higher focus on use of words such as “I” and “my” in corporate communications) (Pennebaker et al. 2003) or comparing an individual’s compensation package relative to the next highest paid member of a given organization (O’Reilly et al. 2014). Legal Concerns Concerns regarding the infringement of legal rights of workers as covered by legislation, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 in the USA, may contribute to the slow pace in which industrial psychologists assess personality disorders within organizations. Legislation such as the ADA protects qualified individuals from being discriminated against based on their disability assuming they are able to perform the essential functions of their job, with or without accommodation. While the reluctance of some industrial psychologists to identify and analyze maladaptive personality traits may stem from legal concerns, the social impact of their use as part of a pre-hire screening may also create hesitance. Although the ADA legislation protects individuals with disabilities from discrimination (if they are capable of performing the job), this legislation also allows for individuals with mental health concerns to request assistance from their employer. Acknowledging this aspect of the legislation is vital, as a supportive work environment is critical for employees with mental health issues. As argued by Klimoski and Donahue (1997), the biggest threat to the spirit of the ADA is not a lack of employment opportunities but rather the fair treatment of workers once employed. Under the ADA, a supportive work environment must include reasonable “accommodations” for protected employees.

34  M.-L. GERMAIN

The Disability Discrimination Act (1995) affords similar accommodation referring to support as “adjustments.” As indicated by Colella and Bruyère (2010) such accommodations are primarily in place to assist with physical disabilities. However, in terms of the personal assistance category, employing someone such as a job coach may be deemed a relevant accommodation to ask of the employer. Klimoski and Palmer (1993) stated that the ADA has two major requirements in relation to testing: “first, a test that screens out or tends to screen out an individual with a disability must be job related and consistent with business necessity” (p. 18). Second, “tests must reflect the skills and aptitudes of an individual with a disability rather than impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills, unless those are job-related skills the test is designed to measure” (p. 18). Ultimately, purpose matters, meaning that while job-related personality tests predicting performance are acceptable, diagnostic tests employed for diagnosing or treating disorders, are not. Recently noted by Colella and Bruyère (2010), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) was unable to be utilized in personnel selection unless the “job relatedness or business necessity” of the instrument was clearly demonstrated, as seen in how the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled regarding Karraker v. Rent-a-Center, Inc. (2005). Exams that are potentially considered a pre-employment medical exam, such as the MMPI, are prohibited under the American with Disability Act. Diagnosing a personality disorder under the DSM-5 trait model is far more complicated than simply relying on the subset of contributing traits. Supporting the significance of this point, Wright (2011) states: “Rarely if ever are individuals with a certain trait or profile of traits found, and then subsequently diagnosed. What this leaves us with is the knowledge of what traits might be elevated if a person possesses a diagnosis, but not the reverse. It is not the case that in the population each individual with a given trait profile possesses the same PD diagnosis, or any diagnosis at all for that matter” (p. 374). In essence, an individual’s profile does not sufficiently stand alone under the APA proposal and, furthermore, measures of maladaptive variants of a personality test (such as the Big Five Inventory) should not be considered medical tests in preemployment settings. Industrial psychologists still require a way to determine whether maladaptive tests are job-related or not. This has often presented problems

3  ASSESSMENT OF NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER (NPD) 

35

for groups covered by the Civil Rights Act (1964), as many industrial psychologists have operated within a specific environment that requires an expression of job relatedness prior to employing the use of cognitive ability tests. In addition to cognitive ability, job analysis exists as the dominant method that organizations use to identify whether tests are job-related (Mitchell et al. 1997). The notion of job-relatedness presents several concerns, with one of the most prominent being the extent that essential functions are defined by contextual performance, much due to the understanding that contextual performance often predicts the existence of maladaptive traits. Recently, Haimann et al. (2013) reviewed a sample of case law, and took over 200 cases into consideration to reach the conclusion that although task performance criteria are certainly components of essential functions, evidence also suggests that such essential functions blatantly parallel contextual performance. Suggesting that the crucial functions of a cashier include following company rules and procedures seen in a ruling from EEOC vs. Walmart (2007) serves as the perfect example of the parallel between essential functions and contextual performance. Wu and LeBreton (2011) claim that their research agenda into the links between the Dark Triad and counter productivity unlikely violates the ADA because (i) assessments are designed explicitly for the work environment and (ii) encountering clinical individuals is unlikely due to the base rate being 1% in the population. Therefore, a solid case exists to support the notion that maladaptive inventories are in fact work-related and legally defensible. The Art of Faking Tests Narcissists commonly rate themselves as superior within a number of personality dimensions, including leadership abilities, intelligence, creativity, and overall competence (Judge et al. 2006), likely due to the fact that narcissism cognitively encompasses an oversized belief in one’s own superior qualities. Although research suggests that individuals maintain the ability to produce false responses to tests, the extent to which this occurs is debatable. Inevitably, the possibility of falsified results erodes the psychometric properties of personality tests and their cumulative validity. Morgeson et al.’s (2007) article claims that faking should not be the biggest concern; rather, focusing on individuals who see no need to fake their results and employing a more effective measurement method than the standard

36  M.-L. GERMAIN

self-report should be the biggest concerns. This notion coincides with maladaptive personality inventories which ask people to rate their agreement to statements such as “I see how far I can push people,” possibly indicating a callous subfacet of the Antagonism factor. Therein lies the problem as few adept test takers would rate this item highly with the understanding that a job is at stake. Unfortunately, little can be done to deal with fake responses outside of using a more dependable source to report on applicant personalities. Less effective solutions to faking answers may involve the use of social desirability scales, identifying false answers after the fact with statistical analyses, or employing the use of forced-choice response options inside of the measurement instrument. Although each of these possible solutions pose problems, the forced-choice option is likely the most useful, as one of the greatest breakthroughs in personality research since the 1990s that industrial psychologists have experienced is improving the efficiency of measurement via advanced item response theory (e.g., Stark et al. 2012) as well as structural equation modeling techniques (Brown and Maydeu-Olivares 2012). Forced-choice designs can offer the recovery of normative test scores, helping to overcome the greatest barrier that exists in adopting them on a wide level. Offering a possible solution to concerns surrounding possible fake results on maladaptive inventories, a recent meta-analysis performed by Salgado and Táuriz (2012) suggests that, overall, forced-choice measures offer greater validity over ratingscale measures.

References American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed., Rev.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.). Washington DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders (4th ed.). American Psychiatric Association; Washington, DC: 2000. Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). American Psychiatric Association. (2011). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Washington DC: Author. Ames, D. R., Rose, P., & Anderson, C. P. (2006). The NPI-16 as a short measure of narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 440–450.

3  ASSESSMENT OF NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER (NPD) 

37

Benson, M. J., & Campbell, J. P. (2007). To be, or not to be, linear: An expanded representation of personality and its relationship to leadership performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 232–249. Brown, A. A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2012). How IRT can solve problems of ipsative data in forced-choice questionnaires. Psychological Methods, 18, 36–52. Cain, N. M., Pincus, A. L., & Ansell, E. B. (2008). Narcissism at the crossroads: Phenotypic description of pathological narcissism across clinical theory, social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(4), 638–656. Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2007). It’s all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3), 351–386. Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2011). Executive personality, capability cues, and risk taking: How narcissistic CEOs react to their successes and stumbles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(2), 202–237. Civil Rights Act of 1964. Retrieved from http://www.archives.gov/education/ lessons/civil-rights-act/. Colella, A. J., & Bruyère, S. M. (2010). Disability and employment: New directions for industrial and organizational psychology. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: Building and developing the organization (Vol. 1, pp. 473–503). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Cycyota, C. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2006). What (not) to expect when surveying executives a meta-analysis of top manager response rates and techniques over time. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 133–160. Disability Discrimination Act of 1995. Retrieved from http://www.legislation. gov.uk/ukpga/1995/50/contents. EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 477 F.3d 561 (8th Cir. 2007). Ellis, H. (1988). Auto-erotism: A psychological study. The Alienist and Neurologist, 19, 260–299. Emmons, R. A. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the narcissistic personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 291–300. Frances, A. J. (1980). The DSM-III personality disorder section: A commentary. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 137, 1050–1054. Guenole, N. (2014). Maladaptive personality at work: Exploring the darkness. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(1), 85–97. doi:10.1111/iops.12114. Haimann, C. R., Gilmore, P. L., & Emmer, M. S. (2013). What is an essential function? A review of evidence used to define essential functions. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 16, 33–52. Harms, P. D., Spain, S. M., Hannah, S. T., Hogan, R., & Foster, J. (2011). You underestimate the power of the dark side: Subclinical traits, the big five, and job performance. Paper presented at the 26th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.

38  M.-L. GERMAIN Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (2009). Hogan development survey manual (2nd ed.). Tulsa, OK: Hogan Assessment Systems. Judge, T. A., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2006). Loving yourself abundantly: Relationship of the narcissistic personality to self- and other perceptions of workplace deviance, leadership, and task and contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 762–776. Karraker v. Rent-A-Center, Inc., 411 F.3d 831 (7th Cir. 2005). Kernberg, O. F. (1975). A systems approach to priority setting of interventions in groups. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 25(3), 251–275. Kernberg, O. F. (1984). The couch at sea: Psychoanalytic studies of group and organizational leadership. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 34(1), 5–23. Kets de Vries, M. F. (1993). Leaders, fools and imposters: Essays on the psychology of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Klimoski, R., & Donahue, L. (1997). HR strategies for integrating individuals with disabilities into the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 7(1), 109–138. Klimoski, R., & Palmer, S. (1993). The ADA and the hiring process in organizations. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 45, 10–36. Kohut, H. (1971). The Analysis of the Self. New York, NY: International Universities Press. Kohut, H. (1977). The Restoration of the Self. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Levy, K. N., Meehan, K. B., Cain, N. M., & Ellison, W. D. (2013). Narcissism in the DSM. In J. S. Ogrodniczuk (Ed.), Understanding and treating pathological narcissism. American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14041-003. Mitchell, K. E., Alliger, G. M., & Morfopoulos, R. (1997). Toward an ADAappropriate job analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 7, 5–26. Morgeson, F. P., Campion, M. A., Dipboye, R. L., Hollenbeck, J. R., Murphy, K., & Schmitt, N. (2007). Are we getting fooled again? Coming to terms with limitations in the use of personality tests for personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 60, 1029–1049. O’Reilly, C. A., Doerr, B., Caldwell, D. F., & Chatman, J. A. (2014). Narcissistic CEOs and executive compensation. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), 218– 231. Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 547–577. Pinto, J. K., & Patanakul, P. (2015). When narcissism drives project champions: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1180–1190. Raskin, R. N., & Hall, C. S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45(2), 590.

3  ASSESSMENT OF NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER (NPD) 

39

Resick, C. J., Whitman, D. S., Weingarden, S. M., & Hiller, N. J. (2009). The bright-side and the dark-side of CEO personality: examining core selfevaluations, narcissism, transformational leadership, and strategic influence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1365. Salgado, J. F., & Táuriz, G. (2012). The five-factor model, forced-choice personality inventories and performance: A comprehensive meta-analysis of academic and occupational validity studies. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 1–28. doi:10.1080/1359432X.2012.716198. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Drasgow, F., & White, L. A. (2012). Adaptive testing with multidimensional pairwise preference items improving the efficiency of personality and other noncognitive assessments. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 463–487. Wright, A. G. (2011). Qualitative and quantitative distinctions in personality disorder. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 370–379. Wu, J., & LeBreton, J. M. (2011). Reconsidering the dispositional basis of counterproductive work behavior: The role of aberrant personality. Personnel Psychology, 64, 593–626.

CHAPTER 4

Narcissism in Leadership and Management: A Research Summary

Abstract  Germain explains how narcissism manifests itself in leaders and managers—how first impressions progressively morph and reveal interpersonal relationship deficiencies, inflate an individual’s sense of his/her ability to lead, and minimize effectiveness. After highlighting the prominence of NPD in specific fields such as sports, politics, and the media, “Narcissism in Leadership and Management” details the human and financial cost that NPD employees have on organizations. Keywords  Narcissism in Leadership and Management NPD in specific fields (sports, politics, media) · First impressions Interpersonal relationship deficiencies · Leadership effectiveness Human and financial cost and NPD employees An executive at the company Oracle once described his narcissistic CEO Larry Ellison the following way: “The difference between God and Larry is that God does not believe he is Larry.” This observation is both amusing and troubling (Wilson 2003). Management scholars and practitioners have identified some definite correlations between leadership styles, disordered traits, and dysfunctions within organizations (Fox and Spector 2005; Goldman 2005). Several researchers have investigated the impact of leader personality disorders on the effectiveness of leadership roles. For example, Goldman (2006a) identified borderline personality behavior as a prototype of preexisting © The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_4

41

42  M.-L. GERMAIN

toxic behavior, resulting in organizational contamination. He noted that dysfunctional leadership behaviors are well-defined. As described by Kets de Vries in 1995, “Some leaders go far beyond the abnormal ways of functioning…They go off the deep end” (p. 217). Recent contributions such as a meta-analysis of narcissism and work performance (O’Boyle et al. 2012) attest to the increased interest in narcissism by researchers over the past decade (e.g., Galvin et al. 2010; Harms et al. 2011; Judge et al. 2006; Judge et al. 2009; Nevicka et al. 2011; Peterson et al. 2012). There is also a growing trend to gain a more thorough understanding of negative workplace behaviors, such as counterproductive work behaviors (CWB), abusive supervision, and incivility (Andersson and Pearson 1999; Sackett 2002; Tepper 2000). This newfound appeal for the study of negative personality traits provides the potential to harness validity often left ignored by trait paradigms that focus on the more positive aspects of personality (Grijalva and Newman in press; Hogan and Hogan 2001; Judge et al. 2006; O’Boyle et al. 2012; Paulhus and Williams 2002; Penney and Spector 2002; Wu and LeBreton 2011). Over the years, many have regarded narcissism as a key factor for achieving leadership success. In particular, Freud suggests that “the leader himself needs love no one else, he may be of a masterful nature, absolutely narcissistic, self-confident, and independent.” (Freud 1921/1991, pp. 123–124). Since leadership positions are often filled by narcissists, such as chief executive officers, vice-presidents, and US presidents (Deluga 1997; Maccoby 2000; Rosenthal and Pittinsky 2006), one can assume there is a connection between narcissism and the opportunities that it offers for leadership roles. The claim that there is a correlation between narcissism and various aspects of leadership has been corroborated by various studies (Davies 2004; Galvin et al. 2010; Harms et al. 2011; Judge et al. 2006). For instance, an extensive study involving military school cadets outlined how narcissism was able to positively predict elements of leadership development and performance (Harms et al. 2011). Also, the research by Judge et al. (2006) supports the idea that narcissism has a positive impact on supervisor reports of transformational leadership. This positive impact holds true despite narcissism’s moderate positive relationship with extraversion (Trzesniewski et al. 2008) and even after controlling for the Big Five personality traits (conscientiousness, openness to experience, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism). Although the majority of the research has been focused on narcissism’s role in positions of leadership (Kets de Vries and Miller

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

43

1985; Maccoby 2000; Rosenthal and Pittinsky 2006), no firm conclusions have been drawn about the positive or negative effects of narcissistic leaders.

Leadership Emergence Narcissistic personalities are a common occurrence in top management positions, as some of the traits that define narcissism are often the same as the ones that define leadership personalities. As professor Kets de Vries (2003) suggests, “It is only to be expected that many narcissistic people, with their need for power, prestige, and glamour, eventually end up in leadership positions. Their sense of drama, their ability to manipulate others, their knack for establishing quick, superficial relationships serve them well in organizational life” (p. 23). Although the traits outlined by Kets de Vries may initially carry a negative connotation, many of these characteristics are rewarded in business organizations, which partially explains why there is a large proportion of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) leaders in executive management positions (Camm 2014). While there is a growing body of literature exploring the relationship between narcissism and leadership, there have been no definitive consensuses reached as to how narcissism impacts leadership. The inconsistency of past findings may be based on several different factors, one of which being that theories regarding the leadership outcomes of narcissism (Padilla et al. 2007) have differentiated narcissism’s association with leadership emergence (i.e., “whether (or to what degree) an individual is viewed as a leader by others, who typically have only limited information about that individual’s performance”; Judge et al. 2002, p. 767; Lord et al. 1986) versus narcissism’s association with leadership effectiveness (i.e., “a leader’s performance in influencing and guiding the activities of his or her unit toward achievement of its goals” (Judge et al. 2002, p. 767; Stogdill 1950). First Impressions Suggested by steadfast studies of leadership, the manner in which we choose our leaders is often dependent on how appropriately people’s characteristics align with our personal understanding of the prototypical leader (Lord et al. 1984; Shondrick et al. 2010). There are a multitude of narcissists’ characteristics that we associate with being “leader like,” such as expressing social domination, possessing very high self-esteem,

44  M.-L. GERMAIN

and acting in an extraverted manner (Ensari et al. 2011; Judge et al. 2002). In accordance with these characteristics, displaying high levels of charisma and excellent social skills is often associated with narcissism (Back et al. 2010; Brunell et al. 2008; Nevicka, De Hoogh, et al. 2011; Nevicka et al. 2011; Paulhus 1998; Ahmadian, Azarshahi, & Paulhus 2017; Schnure 2010). Narcissists tend to dominate leaderless group discussions. Often, their individual performance involving team-based tasks is irrelevant because they are commonly singled out as potential leaders (Brunell et al. 2008; Nevicka et al. 2011). For instance, in a sample of managers that were engaging in a leaderless group discussion, a trained group of independent experts observed that the individuals with the narcissist traits materialized as the leaders (Brunell et al. 2008). To better comprehend the journey that leads narcissists to project a charismatic appearance, especially under conditions where minimal acquaintance exists, one must reference process models of interpersonal judgments, such as the Realistic Accuracy Model (Funder 1995). In order for others to accurately judge a personality trait, the RAM suggests that a trait must manifest in an observable and relevant manner in order for it to be correctly interpreted by others (Funder 1995). In terms of narcissism, the behavioral manifestations that contribute to positive first impressions include displaying charming facial expressions, using body movements that express self-assuredness, having a tendency to dress well, and incorporating the use of verbal humor into conversations (Back et al. 2010; Vazire et al. 2008). These traits “are related to four generally valued aspects of targets: attractiveness, competence, interpersonal warmth, and humor” (Back et al. 2010, p. 134; see also Berscheid and Reis 1998). Additionally, extraversion is one of the most observable and accurately perceived personality traits (Borkenau et al. 2009; Connolly et al. 2007) and is frequently witnessed among narcissists who have a propensity for being highly extraverted (Emmons 1984; Paulhus 1998; Trzesniewski et al. 2008). Extraversion is also a prominent indicator of leadership emergence (Ensari et al. 2011; Judge et al. 2002). This is consistent with the literature on impression management, which is a process through which people seek to influence the image others have of them to reach a specific goal (Bozeman and Kacmar 1997). Impression management manifests itself in various behaviors such as verbal or non-verbal expressions (Goffman 1959).

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

45

Research shows that narcissists generally make a positive first impression, as others preliminarily perceive them to be charming and selfconfident. Narcissists inflate their own importance and achievements. However, over time, negative qualities emerge. They may become arrogant, exploitative, and self-centered, which progressively erodes their work relationships (Back et al. 2010; Paulhus 1998; Robins and Beer 2001). Progressive Reveal of NPD’s Interpersonal Relationship Deficiencies The notion that narcissism’s negative traits are often revealed over extended timeframes is seen in an extensive study done by Paulhus (1998) which outlined the manner in which the perception that people have of narcissists tends to vacillate over time (Campbell and Campbell 2009; Paulhus 1998). In the course of this study, participants engaged in leaderless group discussions over several weeks. Following the first discussion, narcissistic group members were deemed to be “confident, entertaining, and physically attractive.” By the conclusion of the study, they were negatively rated, being described with adjectives such as “hostile, arrogant, and cold” (Paulhus 1998, p. 1204). The latter traits might be negatively associated with the leader prototype, making narcissists increasingly less likely to emerge as leaders over the course of a relationship. Ultimately, narcissists come off as being skilled at initiating relationships but unable to sustain them over time. Similarly, Blair et al. (2008) discovered that narcissists’ supervisors rated them negatively based on interpersonal components of leadership but felt that narcissism did not relate to more task-specific terms of leadership. This has important implications for the ability that narcissists possess to supervise subordinates in an effective manner, as leader–follower exchange (LMX) theory suggests. That is, there is a positive correlation between subordinate performance and the quality of relationships (Graen 1976; Dansereau et al. 1975; Deluga and Perry 1994; Dockery and Steiner 1990; Gerstner and Day 1997). On a broader scale, deficiencies within interpersonal relations have been deemed as a leading predictor of managerial derailment (McCall and Lombardo 1983). The Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) highlighted 10 key reasons as to why managers derail, with no explicit correlation being made to narcissism. Yet, a multitude of reasons for

46  M.-L. GERMAIN

derailment overlap with the specific definition of narcissism. Illustrative reasons include: • Insensitivity (abrasive, intimidating, bullying) • Being cold, aloof, and arrogant • Betraying trust • Being overly ambitious Troubled relationships that lead to managerial derailment is a theme found across several studies (McCall and Lombardo 1983; McCauley and Lombardo 1990; Morrison et al. 1987; Van Velsor and Leslie 1995). In essence, there is a negative correlation between narcissism and leadership effectiveness—when narcissism is high, leadership effectiveness is low. This negative expectation can be gleaned from (a) evidence supporting that narcissists have difficulty retaining positive relationships for long periods of time (Paulhus 1998) and (b) the expectation that part of being an effective leader involves the ability to maintain positive relationships with subordinates (seen by the inclusion of relationship components expressed in many prominent leadership theories [Bass 1985; Graen and Uhl-Bien 1995; Stogdill 1963; Uhl-Bien 2006]). NPD’s Inflated Sense of Leadership Ability Source of Leadership Report Researchers use a variety of methods to measure leadership abilities, including different perspectives or sources (e.g., self-reports and supervisor reports). Although the comparison of self-reports, coworker reports, subordinate reports, and supervisor reports of leadership occur, it is not without the understanding that self-reports of leadership emergence/ effectiveness often reflect a much more positive relationship with narcissism, which is also self-reported. Since narcissists have a proven propensity for self-enhancement spanning various measures, including interpersonal skills, intelligence, creativity, and public speaking, this is to be expected (Campbell et al. 2000; Farwell and Wohlwend-Lloyd 1998; Gabriel et al. 1994; John and Robins 1994; Robins and John 1997). Due to the commonly witnessed self-enhancement tendencies of narcissists, it can be understood that narcissists will inflate leadership selfreports regarding their own personal leadership (e.g., Judge et al. 2006).

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

47

Across Professions and Fields: The Media, Entertainment, Business, Sports, and Politics Many individuals with NPD live relatively normal lives while still attaining notable accomplishments when applying themselves to reaching specific goals. This can be explained by their innate belief that they are exceptional individuals. These individuals are often drawn to fields such as politics, high-level sports, or the entertainment industry based on the fact that success in these fields allows them to shine while having their “winner” status admired (Burgo 2015). Maccoby (2003) noted that narcissists in large corporations are often confined to sales positions, where they can use their persuasiveness and imagination to best effect. Many, however, thrive in fields where they can manipulate facts to a company’s advantage (media, communications or politics), shine publicly (entertainment), or exercise their competitive nature (sports). They are keen at picking up on cues from those around them (and sometimes predict others’ reactions) and are able to adapt rapidly to situations and design strategies for them or for their organization to survive crises. Because their own lives are often a series of crises, they understand and often thrive in chaotic work environments. They also excel at distortion, deflation, and manipulation of facts and at diversion. These skills made NPD individuals particularly suited for communications and media-related jobs.

Organizational Effects of Personality-disordered Employees Extensive research has linked individuals diagnosed with an Axis I psychiatric disorder (such as major depression) or an Axis II disorder (personality disorders) with poor employment outcomes such as increased likelihood of unemployment (Mitchell and Anderson 1989; Ettner et al. 1997; Hamilton et al. 1997; Alexandre and French 2004; Chatterji et al. 2007; Tian et al. 2005; Baldwin and Marcus 2007), employment transitions (Gresenz and Sturm 2004), hours of work (Bartel and Taubman 1979, 1986; Ettner et al. 1997), earnings, income, and wages (Bartel and Taubman 1979, 1986; Ettner et al. 1997; Frank and Gertler 1991; French and Zarkin 1998; Jofre-Bonet et al. 2005; Tian et al. 2005; Baldwin and Marcus 2007), retirement decisions (Tian et al. 2005), absenteeism (French and Zarkin 1998; Chatterji et al. 2007), short-term

48  M.-L. GERMAIN

disability (Kessler et al. 1999), perceived performance at work (Berndt et al. 1998), and work impairment (Kessler and Frank 1997). In addition to the above-mentioned research, other literature has focused more exclusively on clinical disorders, but studies about the influence that personality disorders have on labor market outcomes are rare. That’s partially due to the fact that much of the published research is based on individual case studies (Goldman 2006a, b; Trimpey and Davidson 1994; Babiak 1995) or use single-site convenience samples (Miller et al. 2007; Lim et al. 2000; Reich et al. 1989; Rytsälä et al. 2005; Soeteman et al. 2008; Van Asselt et al. 2007). Several broader studies, such as the Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study by Skodol et al. (2002), utilized data taken from 668 patients from four clinical sites. The studies’ results support the empirical association between PDs and negative outcomes at work. They suggest that people who are diagnosed with schizotypal or borderline PDs are approximately one-third as likely to be employed and three times more likely to be work-disabled. This stands in stark contrast to patients who suffer from major depressive disorder (no significant associations were found with obsessive-compulsive and avoidant PDs, and other PDs were not examined). Environments that breed competition and embrace goals of reaching the top are ideal for NPD leaders and allow them to thrive. No one will play tougher, be meaner, or operate more cleverly than an NPD leader. Various feature films have clearly displayed the manner in which NPD business leaders are rewarded such as Wall Street, Working Girl, and Citizen Kane. It is imperative to understand that the pinnacle of unhealthy narcissism is competition, seen in the workplace as one employee being up while the other one is down, and translating into status, power, and money. In order to feel safe, the NPD leader will often neutralize another’s power in addition to being acutely aware of who is getting what in terms of recognition, opportunity, and power-making decisions. NPD leaders have an innate need to feel as if they are on top of things. In a workplace setting, they may question their subordinates’ every move. They can often be heard saying things such as, “I don’t think that this should be done this way” or “I don’t think this is right.” By making comments such as these or engaging in nitpicking behavior that makes subordinates feel as if they are incompetent, these individuals are able to rid themselves of their own vulnerable feelings.

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

49

The disordered tendencies of an NPD leader may not become apparent until they are displeased with an employee’s work or behavior. Even more likely to bring out the narcissistic tendencies of an NPD leader are situations in which an employee expresses a desire for status, money or power, all of which are desired by the NPD leader. In these situations, the NPD leader may offer the employee excessive attention in order to gratify him. However, upon working more closely with the NPD leader, the employee will likely understand the leader’s true motivations. Being in a situation such as this one will likely cause the employee to be distracted from work because of the excessive attention and support that the NPD leader requires, ultimately leading to frustration and exhaustion for the employee. Initially, the subordinate may not detect any obvious signs of NPD because of the specific purpose that they are fulfilling for the NPD leader. However, as the NPD leader’s need for the subordinate subsides, signs of NPD, as presented in Chaps. 2 and 3, will likely become more obvious. In order to protect themselves and their careers, employees who work with NPD leaders should take specific steps as presented in Chap. 6. The Upsides Characteristics of narcissistic leadership are commonly rewarded in the corporate world (Harrison and Clough 2006). The skills that are often required to successfully fulfill management positions align with NPD employees’ profile relatively well. When these skills are channeled in a constructive manner, they have the potential to accomplish admirable results. Some studies that explore leadership and narcissism support the fact that individuals with NPD traits may be beneficial to organizations as they tend to be charismatic, visionary, high achievers, and hardworking (Kohut 1996; Miller 1991; Maccoby 2000; Meinert 2014; Grijalva et al. 2015). Charisma Effective leaders are expected to be charismatic. Charisma, as defined by Max Weber, is the presence of an individual with exceptional powers or qualities to persuade others. These charismatic qualities are often seen in cult leaders, politicians, or corporate executives. Regardless of our experience with past leaders, we often believe that our current politicians or executives of choice are uniquely different and will bring about lasting

50  M.-L. GERMAIN

change on some level. We are eager to give them that power (Weber 1968). People tend to find comfort in leaders who appear to know where they are going. Maccoby (2003) makes a link between narcissistic and charismatic leadership (Doyle and Lynch 2008), explaining that an NPD leader is accepted because of the massive potential benefits to the organization. Deutschman (2005) noted the visionary and innovative qualities that these individuals possess, qualities that specifically promote leadership. With these charismatic qualities come confidence, a characteristic that is often seen as a strength in Western cultures. With all of the visionary boldness that goes hand in hand with charismatic and narcissistic leadership, also comes the succinct ability to be inspirational, exciting, and to take risks (Galvin et al. 2010). The narcissist who appears to embody our ideals by manipulating their public persona plays into that need by presenting themselves as someone with exceptional talents (Burgo 2015). NPD individuals regard themselves as exceptional and excel at persuading others to believe in their brilliance. In addition to confidence and innovation, narcissistic leaders are also often skillful orators with naturally persuasive personalities. They tell themselves, “I know what to do and I’m confident that I can achieve my goals.” With highly selfish motivations, the NPD individual is able to counteract feelings of shame, inexperience, and defectiveness by feigning the admiration of others. Colleagues, who consciously or unconsciously wish to be associated with success, often give in to the NPD leader’s winner versus loser dichotomy. Although there is often an initial sense of excitement that coexists with the superficial charisma that a narcissistic leader possesses, inevitably the darker side of the narcissist’s personality eventually reveals itself. NPD individuals exploit the admiration of others, allowing them to be set up for disappointment. Vision An important aspect of transformational leadership is the ability of an individual to be visionary, to have the courage to lead organizations in new directions (Conger 1999; Hersey and Blanchard 1982; Blake and Mouton 1985; Maccoby 2000, 2003). These visionary individuals engage in strategic dynamism, meaning they initiate more changes in an organization’s strategy, and more rapidly. The NPD individual engages in acts of grandiosity, undertaking bold moves that attract attention and result in big wins and big losses, ultimately resulting in a fluctuating

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

51

organizational performance from one extreme to the other (Finklestein and Hambrick 1996). This fluctuating performance provides the NPD leader ample opportunities to engage in the exhibitionism that will grant them the attention they so deeply desire. With high-impact and overly dramatic goals, the NPD individual (Dickinson and Pincus 2003) may take on projects that pursue new ventures, untapped markets, or employ new technologies (Pinto and Patanakul 2015). Also, narcissists are often characterized by a preoccupation with fantasies, a trait that can be positively channeled to present a vision for the future of a company. While a sense of self-importance can often be seen as obnoxious, it can often support the perseverance needed to follow a vision through to the end, despite resistance from others. In addition to perseverance, NPD leaders naturally crave attention, even adulation, which makes them particularly adept at gathering followers. While this need for attention can often be dysfunctional or even destructive in relationships, when positively manifested, it can prove to be crucial in pursuing a vision for the future of an organization. However, in his 2003 book, Michael Maccoby warns that while NPD leaders are very skilled at taking an organization to the next level, it comes with a cost. In his own words: “When narcissists win, they win big. Narcissists create a vision to change the world: they are bold risk-takers who think and act independently, pursuing their vision with great passion and perseverance.” Unfortunately, as Maccoby also notes, “The narcissist leaders who have fared the worst throughout history, from Napoleon to Messier, fell prey to unbridled greed and grandiosity, were puffed up by their own vision and initial success, and isolated themselves from advisers who could help them from selfdestructing”.

NPD leaders are valued in organizations for their natural ability to deal well with crisis management. More often than not, they have spent most of their own lives dealing with crises, whether professional or personal. They thrive in crises. They demand crises, which feed their need for admiration from others. They enjoy the opportunity to appear as “saviors.” Kets de Vries (1993) claims that due to the NPD leader’s agility in desperate situations, narcissism can in fact help create group cohesion when an organization is in crisis. However, the benefits are generally short-term, as long-term narcissism is not sustainable due to the manner

52  M.-L. GERMAIN

in which it corrodes employees’ morale and damages organizational climate (Maccoby 2003). Workaholics and High Achievers NPD leaders are known for being high achievers and performing well at whatever they set out to do. When an NPD individual sets a goal, work or otherwise, they will do whatever it takes to meet that goal. Often working longer hours than most employees, NPD leaders tend to be self-sufficient in their work as they view being needy as shameful. Understandably, this self-sufficiency can backfire if they work too independently and are unable to delegate effectively. Whether true or not, NPD leaders are skilled at making people believe that they have single-handedly turned things around for the better, that they lead the “best” team in the company, and that they have reached goals that have never before been met. As mentioned in an earlier chapter, people generally like the idea of having a leader who seems to know where to take them. Regardless of what experience has taught us about our past leaders, we often believe that our current executives of choice are uniquely different and will bring about lasting change. On some level, we are eager to give them that power, even if their goals seem out of touch with reality. The Downsides A plethora of terms is used to describe negative qualities of leadership (Chatterjee and Hambrick 2007; Harrison and Clough 2006). These terms include, “bad” leadership (Higgs 2009); negative leadership, leadership derailment, toxic leadership, “dark-side” leadership, evil leadership, abusive leadership, and destructive leadership. In most cases, the NPD individual’s malignant behavior is rarely known to senior executives, as their superiors often only experience the positive aspects of the NPD employee’s personality. As Malkin (2015) puts it, “The execs put up with him (…) because he treats them like kings and queens” (p. 137). “The higher-ups are in the dark. He’s a total yes-man with them, so they have no idea what’s going on” (p. 138). While some organizations do prioritize employee satisfaction, most still consider revenue a higher priority than employee well-being, ignoring that the two variables are highly correlated. This focus on revenue only encourages the hiring and promoting of NPD leaders.

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

53

One vital aspect of leadership orientation is the level of intensity with which their narcissistic traits have been developed (Kets de Vries and Miller 1985; Camm 2014). NPD leaders generally have poor long-term work relationships. NPD leaders’ biased interpretation of social feedback, fragile ego and aggression often lead to counterproductive work behaviors (Grijalva and Harms 2014). In a group of Major League Baseball CEOs, contingent reward leadership and narcissism were negatively linked (i.e., narcissists were less likely to promote equitable exchange relationships); higher managerturnover was an indirect effect of this association for the narcissistic CEO’s firms (Resick et al. 2009). The downsides to having NPD individuals lead people and organizations are primarily related to their personal flaws, their need for control and power, their difficulty getting along with others, their costly support of pet projects, and their myopic views and behaviors. Personal Flaws Studies performed on toxic and destructive leadership have often centered around the internal effects of such actions and traits rather than on performance outcomes of an external nature (Higgs 2009). McCall and Lombardo (1983) suggested that causes of leadership derailment and failure resulted from a mix of poor performance and personal flaws. Factors included skill deficiencies, employee burn out, insensitivity to others, possessing an aloof and cold attitude, arrogance, betrayal of trust, and excessive ruthlessness. These dysfunctional tendencies were likely to be significantly more detrimental than skill deficiencies. Narcissistic leadership breaks down the structure of an organization internally by the creation of blame-ridden and perpetually toxic cultures (Hogan et al. 1994), an abuse of power (Post 1993), unethical behaviors (Gladwell 2002), and the eventual collapse of the entire organization (Benson and Hogan 2008). Control and Power NPDs have a persistent need to be in command and on top of things; their narcissism demands it. NPD individuals execute this control and power by either taking on an inferior position where they defer to their boss or adopting a superior position and presuming that they are better than other people. Both inferior and superior positions are specifically calculated by the NPD individual in order to sway people into giving

54  M.-L. GERMAIN

them what they want (the very purpose of the relationship they are in). Yet another manner in which NPDs sillicit control in various situations is by promoting reduced group-level information exchange, often proving detrimental to team performance (Nevicka et al. 2011). Difficult to Get Along/Infliction of Pain on Subordinates NPD leaders are eternally hard on subordinates. That is, they are often overly demanding of their subordinates’ time and efforts, as the team performance is a direct reflection on the NPDs ability to lead. It is not uncommon for an NPD leader to throw a tantrum or seemingly lose control if their expectations are not specifically met. This notion supports the effervescent mistrust that the pattern of resisting and devaluing others’ input commonly seen in narcissists’ inevitably produces negative consequences (Kets de Vries and Miller 1985; Maccoby 2000; Rosenthal and Pittinsky 2006). Research on NPD and clinical practice clearly supports the claim that NPD managers and leaders are actually not on top of things. The appearance of competence is just that: an appearance. NPD leaders spend as much energy maintaining this pretense as healthy individuals spend in caring for others. Living in fear, they are driven by the concern that their pretense will breakdown and that they will be exposed to not only the world, but also to themselves. Their suffering is so chronic and interwoven into their being that they may not even feel it as such (Peck 1983). When the spouse of an NPD sees them in a work setting, the behavioral switch is flagrant: the tone of the NPD’s voice may change, the way they interact with colleagues may be different, they may even alter their word choice or speech patterns. In front of others, the NPD will suddenly transform from dull to lively and engaging, from coarse to polished, from demeaning to complimentary, and from depressing to charming. Some call this behavior con artistry. Emotionally abusive leadership behaviors can lead to a myriad of worker responses such as absenteeism, presenteeism, decreased organizational commitment, job satisfaction, psychological well-being, affective commitment, and turnover (Benson 2006; Benson and Campbell 2007; Benson and Hogan 2008; Goldman 2005; Ashford 1994; Duffy et al. 2002). These variables are shown to impact long-term organizational performance via lower subordinate morale and motivation (Benson and Hogan 2008), with the NPD leader’s toxicity having the potential to contaminate a growing number of employees within the organization.

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

55

Pet Projects that are Costly to Organizations Apple CEO Steve Jobs was notorious for supporting costly pet projects that failed miserably such as the Lisa failure in 1983, which cost Apple $50 million in hardware and at least $100 million in development (Pinto and Patanakul 2015). Other projects that have failed included NeXT, the ROKR phone, MobileMe, and Apple Newton. Although the launch of new projects is necessary for organizational growth, pet projects differ in that they are known internally as doomed, perilous, and not supported by data or solid research. Promoting and encouraging pet projects are trademarks of risky and self-serving NPD behavior. For instance, if the NPD leader has a teenage son whose goal is to become a professional actor, she may decide to have her company sponsor a lavish VIP reception and invite CEOs and actors to support the dubious cause. Such a reception would serve her personally as it may grant her the opportunity to meet famous people connected to the movie industry. Essentially, the NPD leader is selfserving and using her influence and organizational resources to support projects that she knows are not in the best interest of the organization. A separate set of studies determined that negative correlations existed between leadership and narcissism (Benson and Campbell 2007; Blair et al. 2008; Khoo and Burch 2008; Resick et al. 2009; Yocum 2006) which was witnessed in the socialized vision component of charisma. This component supports the tendency of NPDs to act altruistically (Galvin et al. 2010), when in actuality they are significantly less likely to place the needs of others above their own needs in a selfless manner. Due to the fact that NPD leaders tend to focus on meeting their own goals and needs rather than tending to the greater good of their organization or their department, Higgs and Rowland (2008) found that negative leadership traits often lead to project failure. The success or failure of a given task can be directly related to the NPD’s motivational factor of self-enhancement opportunity (Pinto and Patanakul 2015). Essentially, an NPD leaders’ performance is motivated by the extrinsic need to be admired by others rather than the intrinsic need to self-evaluate (Wallace and Baumeister 2002). Psychological literature offers the idea that narcissistic tendencies exist with the innate need to attain admiration and a display of continual grandiose patterns. Consequently, it is common for NPD leaders to embark on projects that may be deemed as risky due to the fact that they naturally associate a higher likelihood of success with any of their personal

56  M.-L. GERMAIN

ventures while simultaneously ignoring evidence of risk in their decisionmaking process. In the sense that they always predict success, they are often seen as optimistic (Lovallo and Kahneman 2003). NPD leaders are inherently self-serving, as they routinely accept credit for positive results and deny blame for their failed projects. NPD leaders will search for scapegoats rather than accepting responsibility and attempting to take corrective action, all while pretending to have things under control. They tend to repeatedly support new projects or ventures disregarding evidence of their non-viability (Staw and Ross 1987). While this helps them self-justify for the correctness of a course of action, this method of “saving face” can ultimately waste large amounts of time, energy, and money. In addition, this prompts coalition building, intense political maneuvering, and influence brokering executive management including those which favor and oppose the continued support for the failing initiative. In sum, the NPD leader will put forth their best efforts to divide and conquer. This refusal to take responsibility is closely linked to the NPD leader’s locus of control, which refers to whether a person believes that the outcome of an event is decided by one’s own actions or by chance (Rotter 1954, 1966). A person who believes an outcome is decided by her own actions is described as someone high in internal locus of control. This person believes she has personal power and a sense of control over outcomes. She tends to feel empowered, is more active and engaged in her choices, more confident, with a sense of self-determination. She easily accepts blame for her mistakes. Conversely, an individual who attributes the outcome to chance is described as someone high in external locus of control. This person perceives that she is being acted upon, rather than having personal agency over an aspect of her life. This person has a tendency to generalize situations, is passive, and see herself as a victim being acted on by life’s challenges. Because they cannot handle criticism, NPD leaders often divorce themselves from taking responsibility for failing projects. They will blame others for initiating or derailing the project and possibly lie about their responsibility in order not to feel shame about the failed project. Myopic Views and Behaviors NPD leaders have insatiable thirst to acquire high levels of power, often so much so that this desire can be regarded as dysfunctional or

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

57

even destructive (Camm 2013, 2014). Hubris is a common characteristic witnessed in those showcasing uncontrolled narcissism, particularly seen with leaders who retreat into their own world, existing in a fashion that can only be described as overly opinionated, terribly myopic, and stringently unwilling to seek or take advice from others. “Hubris is a recurring theme in leadership, for the obvious reason that excessive pride and arrogance often accompany power” (Kets de Vries 2003, p. 60). The organizational behavior research literature overwhelmingly supports that NPD leaders exhibit the following: 1.  Abuse of power occurs to serve personal goals, reinforce selfimage, and to conceal personal inadequacies. 2. Inflicting damage on subordinates includes bullying, coercion, psychological damage, and inconsistent or arbitrary treatment. 3. Excessively controlling. 4. Rule breaking to serve the leader’s own purposes are also recurring themes that describe “bad” leaders (Higgs 2009, p. 168), and are consistent with narcissistic personality types. 5. Poor listeners, dysfunctional mentors, competitors, and sensitive to criticism. NPD Triangulation Triangulation is a common tool of the NPD leader. It is defined as indirect communication where one individual acts as messenger between two others, often altering or fabricating the message to suit her objective. It is used to express a situation in which the leader will not communicate directly with an employee, but will communicate with a third employee, forcing the third employee to then be part of the triangle. This allows the NPD leader to play the third employee against one that she’s upset about. This is playing the two people against each other, the NPD leader also engaging in character assassination. The victim is denigrated to others in order to make him or her look bad. The goal of this demonization is to divide and conquer. In a workplace setting, the NPD leader also uses triangulation to exercise power. Padilla et al. (2007) use the term “toxic triangle” as a manner in which to describe catastrophic leaders, a conducive environment, and followers deemed as being susceptible to the NPD’s charm. With

58  M.-L. GERMAIN

the right environment in place, in addition to the willingness of subordinates and their longing for direction and authority, manipulative leaders are given the perfect tools to thrive. This “splitting” is a defense mechanism that allows the NPD leader to preserve her self-esteem, by seeing herself as good and the others as bad. At times, the triangulation takes the form of a “she said/he said” with the NPD leader in the middle controlling and arbitrating the flow of information. She removes the information that does not suit her, twisting facts as needed. The goal is to make others look bad and she looks good in comparison. The damage made by the NPD can be long-lasting. The common question employees ask is, why would the leader say such awful things about this employee if they were not true? Human and Financial Cost of NPD Leaders In 2015, The Society of Human Resource Management, the largest Human Resources professional association in the USA, published an article presenting various legal consequences of hiring narcissists. The authors suggest that hiring employees with big egos (a running characteristics in NPD leaders) comes with a high cost. As forensic psychiatrist Farnsworth and employment lawyer Ella put it, “People with NPD may account for a disproportionate amount of employment-related lawsuits, and research suggests that plaintiffs with NPD may litigate longer and more persistently than others.” They offer three pieces of advice to HR professionals in order to cope with NPD employees. First, “employees with NPD can be very distracting and even destructive. Keep them in check.” Second, “don’t waste time trying to settle a lawsuit once you realize you have someone with NPD on your hands. Litigate away!” Third, “personality tests can screen out candidates with NPD, but conduct the tests carefully as their use may lead to claims of discrimination.” To exist as a high-performing leader one must possess for more skills than simply having the ability to drive deals or crunch numbers. However, hiring individuals solely based on business-based results could backfire, so those in charge of hiring should “take the whole [applicant] into account when filling [the] top slots” (Farnsworth and Ella 2015). Ultimately, Farnsworth and Ella suggest that the best way to deal with NPD employees is not to hire them in the first place.

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

59

Theoretical and Practical Implications Theoretical Implications Prior research shows that the relationship between narcissism and leadership effectiveness is linear, that is, narcissism is neither completely beneficial nor deleterious but best in moderation. There exists an optimal, midrange level of leader narcissism (Grijalva & Harms 2014) that may be beneficial to organizations and employees. Also, narcissism seems to enhance the chances that an individual will emerge as a leader. This effect is especially prominent if leader emergence exists among individuals who are newly acquainted. Since the notion that the negative aspects of narcissism take time to come to light, narcissistic leaders benefit greatly from this characteristic (i.e., to emerge as leader) in situations where the group itself is young, they are new to a group, or during the interview process for a leadership position. Finally, there is an association between narcissism and the tendency of extraversion to drive the emergence of narcissism–leadership relationships (Grijalva & Harms 2014). Therefore, it is important for researchers studying narcissism and leader emergence to make a point of routinely measuring and controlling leader extraversion (a very rare practice). The components of narcissism that can be seen overlapping with extraversion are likely to include exhibitionism and authority (Bradlee and Emmons 1992). It is still unclear whether narcissists emerge as leaders due to something as mundane as a tendency to be talkative, or because of extraverted characteristics such as dominance, self-confidence, or self-promotion. Practical Implications Individuals who express high levels of narcissism are more likely to be chosen for leadership roles, except when those very high levels of narcissism tend to hinder leadership effectiveness (Grijalva & Harms 2014). This supports the idea that organizations should be wary of creating selection and promotion practices specifically catering to narcissists’ strengths (such as unstructured interviews) because, as previously suggested, narcissists have a tendency to be convincingly charming and charismatic within situations of minimal acquaintance (Brunell et al. 2008; Paulhus 1998). Furthermore, organizations must employ extreme caution when regarding the manner in which they score narcissism measures

60  M.-L. GERMAIN

for selection practices. It would be incorrect to assume that lower narcissism scores are more desirable. Rather, narcissism levels that can be measured as being near the population mean are expected to produce the most positive leadership outcomes. Thus, those individuals who express average levels of narcissism are preferable to those who display either very low or very high levels of narcissism. This approach is often beneficial because it is unlikely that applicants will be able to fake moderate levels of narcissism. We look to our leaders to show us the true north. NPD leaders are rarely able to fill that role. They are rarely anchored. They are all sail, no anchor. Yet, these narcissistic leaders possess personality traits that are often rewarded and revered in business organizations, lending itself to the assumption that most people will be forced to interact with NPD leaders at some point in their career. Consequently, understanding what drives narcissists and how to effectively deal with them in a professional setting is the first step to promoting a healthy and successful work environment for all employees. Narcissism at Work—Personality Disorders of Corporate Leaders

References Ahmadian, S., Azarshahi, S., & Paulhus, D. L. (2017). Explaining Donald Trump via communication style: Grandiosity, informality, and dynamism. Personality and Individual Differences, 107, 49–53. Alexandre, P. K., & French, M. T. (2004). Further evidence on the labor market effects of addiction: Chronic drug use and employment in metropolitan Miami. Contemporary Economic Policy, 22(3), 382–393. Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. The Academy of Management Review, 24, 452–471. Ashford, B. E. (1994). Pretty tyranny in organizations. Human relations, 47(4), 755–778. Babiak, P. (1995). When psychopaths go to work: A case study of an industrial psychopath. Applied Psychology, 44(2), 171–188. Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2010). Why are narcissists so charming at first sight? Decoding the narcissism–popularity link at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 132–145. Baldwin, M. L., & Marcus, S. C. (2007). Labor market outcomes of persons with mental disorders. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 46(3), 481–510. Bartel, A., & Taubman, P. (1979). Health and labor market success: The role of various diseases. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 1–8.

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

61

Bartel, A., & Taubman, P. (1986). Some economic and demographic consequences of mental illness. Journal of Labor Economics, 4(2), 243–256. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. Benson, M. J. (2006). New explorations in the field of leadership research: A walk on the dark side of personality & implications for leadership (in) effectiveness. Minnesota University Minneapolis Graduate School, August. Benson, M. J., & Campbell, J. P. (2007). To be, or not to be, linear: An expanded representation of personality and its relationship to leadership performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 232–249. Benson, M. J., & Hogan, R. (2008). How dark side leadership personality destroys trust and degrades organizational effectiveness. Organisations and People, 15(3), 10–18. Berndt, E. R., Finkelstein, S. N., Greenberg, P. E., Howland, R. H., Keith, A., Rush, A. J., et al. (1998). Workplace performance effects from chronic depression and its treatment. Journal of Health Economics, 17(5), 511–535. Berscheid, E., & Reis, H. T. (1998). Attraction and close relationships. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fisk, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill. Blair, C. A., Hoffman, B. J., & Helland, K. R. (2008). Narcissism in organizations: A multisource appraisal reflects different perspectives. Human Performance, 21, 254–276. Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S. (1985). The managerial grid III: A new look at the classic that has boosted productivity and profits for thousands of corporations worldwide. Houston, TX: Gulf. Borkenau, P., Brecke, S., Möttig, C., & Paelecke, M. (2009). Extraversion is accurately perceived after a 50-ms exposure to a face. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 703–706. Bozeman, D. P., & Kacmar, K. M. (1997). A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(1), 9–30. Bradlee, P. M., & Emmons, R. A. (1992). Locating narcissism within the interpersonal circumplex and the five-factor model. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 821–830. Brunell, A. B., Gentry, W. A., Campbell, W. K., Hoffman, B. J., Kuhnert, K. W., & DeMarree, K. G. (2008). Leader emergence: The case of the narcissistic leader. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1663–1676. Burgo, J. (2015). The Narcissist you know: Defending Yourself Against Extreme Narcissists in an All-About-Me Age. New York, NY: Touchstone. Camm, T. W. (2013). Power and politics in organizations. SME annual meeting, Denver, CO. Preprint 13–110. Camm, T. W. (2014). The dark side of leadership: Dealing with a narcissistic boss. SME annual meeting, Salt Lake City, UT. Preprint 14–090.

62  M.-L. GERMAIN Campbell, W. K., & Campbell, S. M. (2009). On the self-regulatory dynamics created by the particular benefits and costs of narcissism: A contextual reinforcement model and examination of leadership. Self and Identity, 8, 214–232. Campbell, W. K., Reeder, G. D., Sedikides, C., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Narcissism and comparative self-enhancement strategies. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 329–347. Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2007). It’s all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52, 351–386. Chatterji, P., Alegria, M., Lu, M., & Takeuchi, D. (2007). Psychiatric disorders and labor market outcomes: evidence from the National Latino and Asian American Study. Health Economics, 16(10), 1069–1090. Connolly, J. J., Kavanagh, E. J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2007). The convergent validity between self and observer ratings of personality: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 110–117. Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider's perspective on these developing streams of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 145–179. Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 13, 46–78. Davies, M. R. (2004). Prediction of transformational leadership by personality constructs for senior Australian organizational executive leaders (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). South Brisbane: Griffith University. Deluga, R. J., & Perry, J. T. (1994). The role of subordinate performance and ingratiation in leader-member exchanges. Group & Organization Management, 19(1), 67–86. Deluga, R. J. (1997). Relationship among American presidential charismatic leadership, narcissism, and rated performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 8, 49–65. Deutschman, A. (2005). Is your boss a psychopath. Fast Company, 96, 44–51. Dickinson, K. A., & Pincus, A. L. (2003). Interpersonal analysis of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Journal of personality disorders, 17(3), 188. Dockery, T. M., & Steiner, D. D. (1990). The role of the initial interaction in leader-member exchange. Group & Organization Studies, 15, 395–413. Doyle, N., & Lynch, P. (2008). Understanding the effect narcissistic leadership has on middle management: an exploratory case study analysis. In Irish Academy of Management Conference Proceedings, September. Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of management Journal, 45(2), 331–351. Emmons, R. A. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the narcissistic personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 291–300.

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

63

Ensari, N., Riggio, R. E., Christian, J., & Carslaw, G. (2011). Who emerges as a leader? Meta analyses of individual differences as predictors of leadership emergence. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 532–536. Ettner, S. L., Frank, R. G., & Kessler, R. C. (1997). The impact of psychiatric disorders on labor market outcomes. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 51(1), 64–81. Farnsworth, M., & Ella, V. J. (2015). The legal consequences of hiring narcissists. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/ pages/0515-narcissistic-personality-disorder.aspx. Farwell, L., & Wohlwend-Lloyd, R. (1998). Narcissistic processes: Optimistic expectations, favorable self-evaluations, and self-enhancing attributions. Journal of Personality, 66, 65–83. Fox, S., & Spector, P. (2005). Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Frank, R., & Gertler, P. (1991). An assessment of measurement error bias for estimating the effect of mental distress on income. The Journal of Human Resources, 26(1), 154–164. French, M. T., & Zarkin, G. A. (1998). Mental health, absenteeism and earnings at a large manufacturing worksite. The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 1(4), 161–172. Freud, S. (1921/1991). On narcissism: An introduction. In J. Sandler, E. S. Person, & P. Fonagy (Eds.), Freud’s “On narcissism: An introduction”. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 652–670. Gabriel, M. T., Critelli, J. W., & Ee, J. S. (1994). Narcissistic illusions in self-evaluations of intelligence and attractiveness. Journal of Personality, 62, 143–155. Galvin, B. M., Waldman, D. A., & Balthazard, P. (2010). Visionary communication qualities as mediators of the relationship between narcissism and attributions of leader charisma. Personnel Psychology, 63, 509–537. Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827–844. Gladwell, M. (2002). The talent myth. The New Yorker, 22, 28–33. Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday. Goldman, A. (2005). Leadership pathology as a nexus of dysfunctional organizations. Paper presented at The Academy of Management Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii, August. Goldman, A. (2006a). High toxicity leadership: Borderline personality disorder and the dysfunctional organization. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(8), 733–746. Goldman, A. (2006b). Personality disorders in leaders: Implications of the DSM IV-TR in assessing dysfunctional organizations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(5), 392–414.

64  M.-L. GERMAIN Graen, G. B. (1976). Role-making process within complex organizations. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1201–1245). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219–247. Gresenz, C. R., & Sturm, R. (2004). Mental health and employment transitions. In D. E. Marcotte & V. Wilcox-Gök (Eds), The economics of gender and mental illness. (Vol. 15. Elsevier Press; 2004. pp. 95–108). (book series Research in Human Capital Development). Grijalva, E., & Harms, P. D. (2014). Narcissism: An integrative synthesis and dominance complementarity model. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(2), 108–127. Grijalva, E., Harms, P. D., Newman, D. A., Gaddis, B. H., & Fraley, R. C. (2015). Narcissism and leadership: A meta‐analytic review of linear and nonlinear relationships. Personnel Psychology, 68(1), 1–47. Hamilton, V. H., Merrigan, P., & Dufresne, É. (1997). Down and out: Estimating the relationship between mental health and unemployment. Health Economics, 6(4), 397–406. Harms, P. D., Spain, S. M., & Hannah, S. T. (2011). Leader development and the dark side of personality. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 495–509. Harrison, J. K., & Clough, M. W. (2006). Characteristics of “state of the art” leaders: Productive narcissism versus emotional intelligence and level 5 capabilities. The Social Science Journal, 43, 287–292. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1982). Management of Organisational Behaviour (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. H. (2008). Change leadership that works: The role of positive psychology. Organisations and People, 15(2), 12. Higgs, M. (2009). The good, the bad and the ugly: Leadership and narcissism. Journal of change management, 9(2), 165–178. Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American psychologist, 49(6), 493. Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership: A view of the dark side. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 40–51. Jofre-Bonet, M., Busch, S. H., Falba, T. A., & Sindelar, J. L. (2005). Poor mental health and smoking: Interactive impact on wages. Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 8(4), 193. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765–780. Judge, T. A., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2006). Loving yourself abundantly: Relationship of the narcissistic personality to self- and other perceptions of

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

65

workplace deviance, leadership, and task and contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 762–776. Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: A review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 855–875. John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 206–219. Kessler, R. C., & Frank, R. G. (1997). The impact of psychiatric disorders on work loss days. Psychological Medicine, 27(04), 861–873. Kessler, R. C., Barber, C., Birnbaum, H. G., Frank, R. G., Greenberg, P. E., Rose, R. M., et al. (1999). Depression in the workplace: Effects on short-term disability. Health Affairs, 18(5), 163–171. Kets de Vries, M. F. R., & Miller, D. (1985). Narcissism and leadership: An object relations perspective. Human Relations, 38, 583–601. Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1993). Leaders, fools and imposters: Essays on the psychology of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1995). Life and death in the executive fast lane. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (2003). Leaders, Fools and Impostors: Essays on the Psychology of Leadership. Lincoln, NE: iUniverse. Khoo, H. S., & Burch, G. J. (2008). The “dark side” of leadership personality and transformational leadership: An exploratory study. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 86–97. Kohut, H. (1996). Forms and transformations of narcissism. Journal of the Americas psychoanalytical Association, 14, 243–272. Lim, D., Sanderson, K., & Andrews, G. (2000). Lost productivity among fulltime workers with mental disorders. The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 3(3), 139–146. Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & deVader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 343–378. Lord, R. G., deVader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 402–410. Lovallo, D., & Kahneman, D. (2003). Delusions of success. Harvard Business Review, 81(7), 56–63. Maccoby, M. (2000). Narcissistic leaders: The incredible pros, the inevitable cons. Harvard Business Review, 82, 92–101. Maccoby, M. (2003). The Productive Narcissist: The Promise and Peril of Visionary Leadership. New York, NY: Broadway Books.

66  M.-L. GERMAIN McCall, M. W. Jr., & Lombardo, M. M. (1983). Off the track: Why and how successful executives get derailed. Technical Report No. 21. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. McCauley, C. D., & Lombardo, M. M. (1990). Benchmarks: An instrument for diagnosing managerial strengths and weaknesses. In K. E. Clark & M. B. Clark (Eds.), Measures of leadership (pp. 535–545). Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. Malkin, C. (2015). Rethinking narcissism: The bad—And surprising good—About feeling special. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Meinert, D. (2014). Are narcissistic bosses all bad? Retrieved from https://www. shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/Pages/0314-execbrief.aspx. Miller, D. (1991). Stale in the saddle: CEO tenure and the match between organization and environment. Management science, 37(1), 34–52. Miller, J. D., Campbell, W. K., & Pilkonis, P. A. (2007). Narcissistic personality disorder: Relations with distress and functional impairment. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 48(2), 170–177. Mitchell, J. M., & Anderson, K. H. (1989). Mental health and the labor force participation of older workers. Inquiry, 262–271. Morrison, A. M., White, R. P., & Van Velsor, E. (1987). Breaking the glass ceiling. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Nevicka, B., Ten Velden, F. S., De Hoogh, A. H. B., & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (2011). Reality at odds with perceptions: Narcissistic leaders and group performance. Psychological Science, 22, 1259–1264. O’Boyle, E. H., Forsyth, D. R., Banks, G. C., & McDaniel, M. A. (2012). A meta-analysis of the dark triad and work behavior: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 557–579. Padilla, A., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2007). The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive environments. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 176–194. Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait selfenhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 197–208. Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556–563. Peck, M. S. (1983). People of the lie: The hope for healing human evil. New York: Simon & Schuster. Penney, L. M., & Spector, P. E. (2002). Narcissism and counterproductive work behavior: Do bigger egos mean bigger problems? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10, 126–134. Peterson, S. J., Galvin, B. M., & Lange, D. (2012). CEO servant leadership: Exploring executive characteristics and firm performance. Personnel Psychology, 65, 565–596.

4  NARCISSISM IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT … 

67

Pinto, J. K., & Patanakul, P. (2015). When narcissism drives project champions: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1180–1190. Post, J. M. (1993). Current concepts of the narcissistic personality: Implications for political psychology. Political Psychology, 14(1), 99–121. Reich, J., Yates, W., & Nduaguba, M. (1989). Prevalence of DSM-III personality disorders in the community. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 24(1), 12–16. Resick, C. J., Whitman, D. S., Weingarden, S. M., & Hiller, N. J. (2009). The bright-side and the dark-side of CEO personality: Examining core self-evaluations, narcissism, transformational leadership, and strategic influence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1365–1381. Robins, R. W., & Beer, J. S. (2001). Positive illusions about the self: Short-term benefits and long-term costs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 340–352. Robins, R. W., & John, O. P. (1997). Effects of visual perspective and narcissism on self-perception: Is seeing believing? Psychological Science, 8, 37–42. Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 617–633. Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1. Rytsälä, H. J., Melartin, T. K., Leskelä, U. S., Sokero, T. P., Lestelä-Mielonen, P. S., & Isometsä, E. T. (2005). Functional and work disability in major depressive disorder. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 193(3), 189–195. Sackett, P. R. (2002). The structure of counterproductive work behaviors: Dimensionality and relationships with facets of job performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. Special Issue: Counterproductive Behaviors at Work, 10, 5–11. Schnure, K. (2010, April). Narcissism levels and ratings of executive leadership potential. Paper presented at the 25th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA. Shondrick, S. J., Dinh, J. E., & Lord, R. G. (2010). Developments in implicit leadership theory and cognitive science: Applications to improving measurement and understanding alternatives to hierarchical leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 959–978. Skodol, A. E., Gunderson, J. G., Pfohl, B., Widiger, T. A., Livesley, W. J., & Siever, L. J. (2002). The borderline diagnosis I: psychopathology, comorbidity, and personaltity structure. Biological psychiatry, 51(12), 936–950. Soeteman, D. I., Roijen, L. H. V., Verheul, R., & Busschbach, J. J. (2008). The economic burden of personality disorders in mental health care. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 69(2), 259–265.

68  M.-L. GERMAIN Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1987). Behavior in escalation situations: Antecedents, prototypes, and solutions. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 39–78). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Stogdill, R. M. (1950). Leadership, membership, and organization. Psychological Bulletin, 47, 1–14. Stogdill, R. M. (1963). What should be expected of expectation theory? Oxford: Ronald Press. Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190. Tian, H., Robinson, R. L., & Sturm, R. (2005). Labor market, financial, insurance and disability outcomes among near elderly Americans with depression and pain. Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 8(4), 219. Trimpey, M., & Davidson, S. (1994). Chaos, perfectionism, and sabotage: Personality disorders in the workplace. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 15(1), 27–36. Trzesniewski, K. H., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2008). Is “generation me” really more narcissistic than previous generations? Journal of Personality, 76, 903–918. Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 654–676. Van Asselt, A. D. I., Dirksen, C. D., Arntz, A., & Severens, J. L. (2007). The cost of borderline personality disorder: Societal cost of illness in BPD-patients. European Psychiatry, 22(6), 354–361. Van Velsor, E., & Leslie, J. B. (1995). Why executives derail: Perspectives across time and cultures. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 9, 62–72. Vazire, S., Naumann, L. P., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2008). Portrait of a narcissist: Manifestations of narcissism in physical appearance. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1439–1447. Wallace, H. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2002). The performance of narcissists rises and falls with perceived opportunity for glory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), 819. Weber, M. (1968). On charisma and institution building. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wilson, M. (2003). Difference between god and Larry Ellison: God doesn’t think he’s Larry Ellison. New York: HarperCollins Publishers. Wu, J., & LeBreton, J. M. (2011). Reconsidering the dispositional basis of counterproductive work behavior: The role of aberrant personality. Personnel Psychology, 64, 593–626. Yocum, R. (2006). The moderating effects of narcissism on the relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership effectiveness, moral reasoning, and managerial trust (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Seattle Pacific University, Seattle, WA.

PART II

Understanding NPD Corporate Leaders

CHAPTER 5

How NPD Leaders Perceive Themselves and Others

Abstract  ‘How NPD Leaders Perceive Themselves and Others’ presents an overview of where NPD individuals’ feelings of inadequacy may have originated and how those feelings are experienced by the NPD leader. After emphasizing common childhood patterns in NPD individuals, Germain delves into NPDs’ self-perception, their defense mechanisms, and describes the abusive techniques they employ to achieve success. This chapter includes a sample monologue written by an NPD individual and concludes by detailing how NPD leaders perceive the people around them. Keywords  Feelings of inadequacy · Childhood patterns in NPD individuals · NPDs’ self-perception · Defense mechanisms · Abusive techniques to achieve success · NPDs’ perception of people

How NPD Leaders Perceive Themselves As seen in previous chapters, narcissistic leaders can be brilliant and skilled yet arrogant, paranoid, and thin-skinned. They are always in flight from pain as extreme narcissism is a defensive response to the painful awareness of internal defectiveness (Burgo 2015). This chapter presents an overview of how these feelings of inadequacy may have originated and how they are experienced by the NPD person.

© The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_5

71

72  M.-L. GERMAIN

Childhood Patterns of a Narcissist The most typical victims of malevolence are children. They are the weakest, most vulnerable, and inherently defenseless members of our society. The power that parents exercise over their children is subject to abuse with varying degrees of malignancy (Peck 1983). Without the joyful relationships that babies need in order to thrive, they may over time develop a defensive identity meant to disguise themselves from others. The self-hate that these children feel develops early on in life and often results from poor attachment styles with their caregivers, violence, or trauma that they have endured (Ainsworth and Bowlby 1991; Bowlby 2005; Germain 2011; Schulte et al. 1994). These children develop extensive defense mechanisms, unconscious lies that they tell themselves to evade pain and in order to deny or rid themselves from the shame that they feel (Burgo 2015). For example, rather than bearing the burden of their shameful emotions, they project them on to someone else, forcing their victims to carry it for them. Under the guidance of their parents, children are traditionally taught to become less egocentric and develop the ability to empathize with other people. While parents do have a responsibility to love their children unconditionally, most psychologists would agree that they should not unconditionally accept everything that their children do. As children grow older, they need their parents to set clear limits, create standards and expectations for behavior, and help curtail their innate grandiosity. While a child’s self-esteem is largely built on receiving unconditional love, conditional approval based on a clear set of humility-driven guidelines is also essential. Children who are frequently spoiled or constantly praised may feel entitled to get what they want without earning it. With too much praise and/or ineffective punishments, children often grow up feeling that they are an exception to the rule and not subject to follow guidelines in the same manner as others. Because their parents set too few limits, these children develop a sense of entitlement, often fostering a lack of respect for the feelings and rights of others. Alternatively, some children develop entitlement as an over-compensation for feeling defective or deprived. When children develop this type of entitlement, they regularly demand to get their own way, ensuring that they are never devalued. If and when children do feel rejected or criticized, they will likely become defensive and engage in a counterattack. Often, these children also have difficulties setting realistic goals or putting in the necessary efforts to achieve them.

5  HOW NPD LEADERS PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AND OTHERS 

73

A child’s feeling of defectiveness is often the direct result of their parents’ criticism and rejection during childhood. This continual criticism breeds feelings of humiliation and shame causing children to view themselves as flawed, inferior, or unlovable. Fearing that close relationships will result in the exposing of these flaws or eventual rejection, children of narcissists will often keep people at a distance. In order to compensate for their weaknesses, they will maintain a flawless appearance or seek out high-power positions. Whether spoiled or deprived, children who grow up with narcissistic parents often remain trapped in the toxic parent-child relationship, unable to escape a prison of expectations and paralyzed from developing an independent sense of self (Miller 1996). A narcissistic parent places high value on accomplishments and image rather than emotional love. As a result, their children feel emotionally deprived from a lack of parental nurturing and empathy. Children of narcissistic parents often feel empty and lonely, and while they crave a close connection, if offered one, they will likely pull away. Parents who live through their children have a pernicious influence. They may idealize their child to such an extent that the child never experiences true empathy or love. They see their children as extensions of themselves, not thinking about how their children are influenced by their decisions. Self-absorbed and insensitive to the needs of others, narcissistic parents fail to make their offspring feel safe and loved for who they are, one of a parent’s most crucial jobs. When they do express care for their child, it is not altruistically. Constantly seeking recognition or fame, these parents will display a sense of caring only when the child can aid them in achieving a goal. Using their child as a tool, the narcissistic parent disregards the child’s likes, dislikes or preferences. This disregard is taken even further when a parent convinces or bribes their child to obtain help with fulfilling their personal needs. Because these children are exploited in order to fulfill the parents’ self-image, they are often unable to build authentic self-esteem. By driving their children to achieve great successes, the narcissistic parent is able to feel relief from their own unconscious shame. Narcissism begets narcissism. Children of narcissistic parents desperately seek approval and often become narcissists themselves, craving admiration and displaying indifference to the feelings of others. As Ronningstam (1998) suggests, “The combination of one doting but emotional depriving parent who delivers a message of specialness along with unrealistic expectations and a second non-doting parent who is absent, critical, entitled, cold, disengaging, or rejecting sets the stage for NPD” (p. 247).

74  M.-L. GERMAIN

It is a noteworthy observation that narcissists who are extreme on the NPD continuum depict their childhood as normal, if not ideal. They often claim that their parents were (or are) devoted and kind. This denial and idealization is a classic example of a defense mechanism used to cover up childhood wounds and trauma. A common trait for children of narcissistic parents is choosing to work in professions or fields that place them in the public eye. Careers in politics, the media, entertainment, or professional sports allow them an opportunity to gain attention, acclaim, and exercise power over others. Defense Mechanisms and Abusive Techniques Extreme narcissists display two major traits: An inflated sense of selfimportance and an indifference to the feelings of others. Other traits may include arrogance, competitiveness, a sense of entitlement, being manipulative, humiliating or exploiting others, and treating others poorly. To narcissists, the end justifies the means; they will quickly betray their most avid supporters if they find a better deal elsewhere. NPD individuals stop living by the core values they may have been taught to believe in. Although they know that their actions are wrong, they convince themselves that normal rules do not apply to them, as it may have also been the case when they were growing up. NPD individuals only consider themselves, boasting a sense of entitlement that allows them to disregard the feelings of others. They lack any sense of empathy, a quality that is necessary in order to regulate emotions such as anger or rage. This empathetic deficiency explains the innate ability that narcissists have to verbally attack or physically intimidate others when feeling shamed or inferior. Intense verbal aggression is a typical defense mechanism utilized by narcissists, with such attacks knowing no bounds and being void of any emotional attachment. Behaviors such as these will intensify as people in the NPD individual’s life attempt to assert their own needs. Narcissists will often develop feelings of resentment toward people who assert their needs and cause the NPD individuals to experience a loss of control (Payson 2002). With behaviors similar to a wounded animal, narcissists assault their victims viciously, regarding criticism as a personal attack. They place extreme value on their reputation and will react in a primordial manner to preserve it. It would not be uncommon to hear an NPD individual bully, “If you do anything to damage my reputation, I will break your neck into pieces.” Aggressive verbal threats such as these are not unusual for a narcissist.

5  HOW NPD LEADERS PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AND OTHERS 

75

In addition to preserving their reputation, NPD individuals strive to maintain the appearance of moral purity. Sensitive to social norms and others opinions of them, they generally dress well, are dedicated workers, and appear to live irreproachable lives. Appearance is crucial to narcissists, as they are not motivated by “being good” but rather by “appearing good.” They have no tolerance for the pain that is often associated with self-reproach. They maintain the mindset that they can do no wrong but will defend themselves when they feel that their reputation is in jeopardy. Often shifting blame onto others, narcissists believe that they are innocent. The following reactions and defense mechanism are commonly displayed by NPD individuals and are a direct result of the shame that exists at the core of narcissistic personality disorder. Silent Treatment The NPD individual may subject a person to the silent treatment for several hours or even days as a punishment. By refusing to speak about what prompted the silent treatment, the narcissist shows how they are unable to recognize the impact of their behaviors or acknowledge their own personal responsibility in the matter. A punishment such as the silent treatment can be devastating to the recipient, as she realizes that the narcissist is incapable of empathizing with her feelings. Complete dismissal of others is a common method that narcissists use in order to cover up their anger, a dangerous coping technique that can eventually lead to extreme rage. Conflict Avoidance Another defensive tactic that an NPD individual may employ is to avoid conflict at all cost. While initially the narcissist will appear to agree with another individual, they will then do the complete opposite of what they previously said. When confronted about their actions, they will forge forgetfulness, blame others for their actions, or even play dumb. The NPD individual might stonewall the inquirer by simply refusing to discuss the situation or by physically leaving the room. This conflict avoidance technique also acts to alienate the victim who is now unable to reach a resolution to the issue. By constantly sweeping problems to be addressed under the rug (Peck 1983), they avoid having to face self-awareness. This technique serves as a sort of self-anesthesia and psychic numbing. By engaging in conflict avoidance, narcissists are able to escape legitimate

76  M.-L. GERMAIN

suffering and elude the pain of their own wrongdoing and imperfection. The mindset of an NPD individual is that their guilt must go; their will must stay. Smudging the Truth NPD individuals tend to have a problematic relationship with the truth. In addition to the repeated lies that they tell co-workers, friends, or family members, they are known to invent stories in an effort to polish their image. Surprisingly, narcissists generally don’t lie in order to deceive others as much as they lie in an effort to deceive themselves (Peck 1983). There is a multitude of reasons why the NPD individual engages in lying, which include a fear of reporting their wrongdoing, attempting to preserve their perfect self-image, or to cover up something that they know (and may feel) is undesirable. One Coping Mechanism: Work Through their work, NPD individuals have the opportunity to become “something.” Work is their chance to be a winner and to potentially gain power, control, recognition, admiration and money. Driven by success, work gives narcissists the means to escape other undesirable aspects of their lives and experience the glory that comes from triumphing over adversaries. While some may admire their combative spirit, those who dare to challenge the NPD individual are seen to be envious trolls or losers and often fall victim to the extreme rage that the narcissist may express when crossed. Threats Fond of threatening with lawsuits, narcissists will threaten to sue for even the most trivial of matters. An NPD person may threaten to sue their child’s friend for not returning a skateboard or may claim an alleged character libel without a valid reason. The idea of beating the legal system empowers them, as does the empty threat of filing a lawsuit. If a lawsuit is filed, an extreme narcissist would go to great lengths in order to win against a person or an employer. To win her epic battle, she would hire the “best” attorney, lineup the most “important” people to testify, gather the “strongest” pieces of evidence, and so on. Narcissists employ a win-at-any-cost attitude, even if that entails imploring deceitful tactics. Personalizing any battle that they embark on, the NPD individuals will be aggressive and pestering, with their ultimate goal to be perceived as victorious.

5  HOW NPD LEADERS PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AND OTHERS 

77

If they are indeed victorious, the narcissist will present herself as the winner of the most “difficult” lawsuit an employee has ever filed against an organization in North America, boasting her image with grandiose claims. If she loses the battle, she will aggressively blame everyone but herself (likely her attorney for not doing his job, a witness who did not say the “right” things, a rigged legal system, or a judge who was incompetent), making certain that her image is not tarnished by the humiliating loss. A known narcissist, Donald Trump, is notorious for filing lawsuits against anyone who challenges him. Despite his numerous lawsuit losses, he relentlessly initiates legal suits in an attempt to win and/or make the claimants life a “living hell.” The Martyr Acting as a martyr is a technique that the NPD individual may implore in order to punish others and express their anger. She will knowingly play the victim role in front of a third party with the goal of making the other person look like the “the bad guy” and relinquish her shame for her own despicable actions and words. She will pretend that “the bad guy” acted improperly—not her—projecting her wrongdoing onto others. Unfortunately, she may recruit the most vulnerable people into this triangulating game. In a home setting, that person may be a child while in a work setting, the victim may be an employee who works under her. By using guilt and self-pity, the narcissist is able to instill a sense of obligation in others to conform to their wishes. The NPD individual may also enlist the sympathy of others by hiding her rage and abusive behavior. Following this deceitful behavior, the narcissist will then completely ignore the other person while expecting an apology. Blaming Others for their Mistakes NPD individuals rarely take responsibility for their mistakes. Admitting responsibility for their errors would be admitting that they are fallible or imperfect, which hits the core of their self-esteem. Shame is to be avoided at all cost, even if that entails blaming innocent co-workers for the NPD person’s mistakes. If an NPD leader’s pet project fails, she may suddenly claim that it was not her idea or that someone’s incompetence led to the failure of the project. Alternatively, she may simply lie about the extent of the disastrous loss and claim it is a huge success, in an attempt to smudge the perception of people who do not have access to critical information about the scope of the loss.

78  M.-L. GERMAIN

Alliances and Smear Campaigns Forming alliances with others is a common tactic used by NPD workers as a means to attack. The narcissist compiles a team in an effort to build her own self-esteem at the expense of others, enlisting co-workers to conspire in the defeat of any potential adversaries. When the NPD person is in a position of leadership, recruiting co-workers for their campaign comes fairly easily as some workers may see the association as a boost for their status. Subordinates of the NPD leader may also feel coerced to become her ally since they are not in a position of power. The narcissist is a masterful manipulator. She is able to entice the participation of co-workers by portraying charming behavior, making them feel “special,” or offering various incentives. She may promise a promotion or elaborate benefits in order to keep co-workers as dutiful alliances. But whether in a private or work context, the NPD individual rarely gives without expecting something in return. Although not always explicit, any act of generosity displayed by a narcissist comes with strings attached. NPD individuals are not only destructive team leaders, but often poor team members as well. By placing their personal interests before the interest of the team, they create a perpetually toxic environment that inherently destroys alliances in the short or long term. By fermenting group hatred of an eternal enemy, the narcissist creates a cohesive group. The narcissists’ team may even appear to have symbiotic relationships due to the instruction from the NPD leader to focus on the deficiencies of competing teams rather than on the deficiencies of their own team members. This approach encourages the avoidance of self-examination and guilt. Because narcissists view the world through a competitive lens, they believe that other successful teams make them look like losers. Efforts to defeat the competing team may include tactics such as spreading rumors, isolating people, withholding information, criticizing others’ work, or ridiculing adversarial co-workers. By imposing unreasonable deadlines or changing project guidelines, NPD leaders are able to reach their own personal goals by sabotaging others’ work, a prime example of bullying in the workplace. Bullying campaigns at work may include disparaging, encouraging employees to ridicule others, changing job duties and workload, or unfairly accusing co-workers of wrongdoing. The NPD leader may set employees up to fail by communicating demands haphazardly and

5  HOW NPD LEADERS PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AND OTHERS 

79

withholding important information. Attacks such as these can potentially last for months and result in extreme emotional consequences for the victims. Victims of such abuse may feel helpless, vulnerable, or isolated and will likely experience a loss of self-confidence, an increasing inability to concentrate, and faltering productivity. Over time, this employee may even become depressed, often blaming himself. Such extreme injustice may even prompt the victim to quit his job, the alternative being to endure the narcissists’ relentless abuse. Narcissistic leaders do not play well with others. They often sabotage the success of their peers in order to save face. Rather than praising co-workers for a job well done, the NPD individual will ignore their colleagues’ successes. This inability to recognize fellow employees’ achievements originates from personal feelings of inadequacy. Acknowledging the success of others threatens the NPD individual’s inherent need to feel superior. Although she might be aware of the envy that she feels for the success of others, she will not genuinely validate such accolades unless she can take credit for it herself. A seemingly ideal employee, the narcissist quickly becomes the worst hire ever, much due to the fact that they exist in a dichotomous world. They require ongoing victories in the workplace in order to prove that they are shame-free and winners rather than losers. When confronted with a loss, narcissists must inflict their shame upon those around them. Extreme narcissists boost their own self-esteem at the expense of co-workers, resulting in devastating consequences. Victims of the narcissist become scapegoats, depicted as losers, and responsible for all of the problems in the workplace. NPD individuals are able to accomplish their goals by coming across as victims of mistreatment to disguise their vicious intentions and fool their colleagues. If an astute victim of her manipulation confronts her by pointing out some of the defense mechanisms she employs, she will outright deny them. Instead, she will try to convince that person that they are completely wrong in their assessment of her, especially if she still needs something from that person. In an attempt to further manipulate her victim, she may say, “I know you think I am manipulative and that’s really sad to me, but I can assure you that I am not being manipulative.” It is doubtful that she feels sad for being manipulative, and it is unlikely she is able to quit using her dysfunctional techniques. Contrary to what one may think, being a narcissist is no easy task. An NPD individual lives in a constant state of turmoil and internal torment.

80  M.-L. GERMAIN

Her life is often a sequence of crises, most of which she creates. She lives in constant crisis mode. She thrives in crisis mode. She even oftentimes chooses a profession where she can solve crises. She enrolls others into her world of crises. Most of the crises she faces could have been prevented. When confronted with adversity, a narcissist perceives it as an enemy to compete against or obsess about, with the challenge having an addictive and all-consuming effect on them. The narcissists’ urgent need to win fuels their unrelenting efforts, which can be particularly beneficial for an organization that must continually solve crises. Narcissists spend considerable energy maintaining their defense mechanisms. Relying on defenses that exude a persona of being bullet-proof or “steeled,” narcissists are only momentarily wounded by criticism or defeat. They possess the innate ability to recover instantly, immediately shifting into attack mode. Constantly on guard, the NPD individual is hyper-prepared to fend off criticism and protect their self-esteem. Because NPDs are often unaware of the defense mechanisms that they employ and their avoidance of internal shame, most of them never change. As with many illnesses, diseases, or addictions, in order to change, a person must first admit to herself that she has a problem. Ultimately, for those who suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, changing would require them to be people that they have never been. The Narcissist Talks Based on the DSM-5 characteristics of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, the following paragraphs describe how an NPD leader may feel. I’d say that I often feel socially distressed. I have a difficult time developing and maintaining long-term relationships, personally and professionally. I like to have people around to distract me (the smart, the powerful or the good-looking ones, that is) but I get quickly bored and annoyed with them. I like the company of some people but I’m uncomfortable with too much closeness and with sharing personal information that make me appear inferior to others. I’ve been told I can be conceited, boastful or pretentious. I do tend to monopolize conversations, especially if the ongoing ones are not of interest to me. When that’s the case, I swiftly change the topic of conversation to my liking. I’m pretty good at picking up where someone is talking and providing an example of my own to illustrate what they are saying. I’m not too interested in learning about others’ stories or personal lives unless they are

5  HOW NPD LEADERS PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AND OTHERS 

81

relevant to me. I will listen if I think the speaker can help me in one way or another down the road, personally or professionally. I work very hard. I like my work—it’s easier than personal relationships. I like to be the boss. My efforts and personal investment in my work almost always pay off. But the truth be told, I really don’t think I am that smart. I play a good game pretending that I am. And sometimes I feel depressed and moody because I fall short of perfection. I need time alone and I need my own space to escape. I do feel a sense of entitlement. When I don’t receive special treatment, I may become impatient or angry. In fact, I lose patience easily. Sometimes I have a hard time controlling my anger. I have limited patience for the “little people.” Mainly, I think they don’t have much to contribute and I’m not interested in them. They’re pretty much a waste of my time. To feel better, I may react with rage or contempt. Occasionally, if I don’t get my way, I raise my hand and threaten. I may belittle the other person to make myself appear superior. I may not do that while there are guests around because I don’t want to be perceived as a bad person, but as soon as these guests leave my house or office, my spouse or my staff gets an earful. And I don’t mind using mean words: he is a troll, she’s worthless, he’s fat, and so on. At work, I try to keep my composure because I could get fired if I didn’t. There, I contain myself but when I get home, I must decompress. To cool off, I exercise but it’s often not enough. I try not to take it out on my spouse but it happens. I also belittle her. She’s an easy target. I know exactly what buttons to push to pick a fight. Or I walk out on her if she wants to talk about things I’m not interested in. I once did that at work when a subordinate told me she had been promoted. I told her I had been there done that and what she had achieved wasn’t really that hard. Deep inside me though I knew that what she had accomplished was really good and important for her career. I remember being in her office mimicking hitting a golf ball with an imaginary golf club just to illustrate to her how easy and insignificant her accomplishment was. I really didn’t like the fact that she was catching up with me professionally. I’ve also been told I belittle or look down on people I perceive as inferior. I can also be quite antagonistic. I’ve always had ongoing fights in my relationships, both at work and at home. I don’t like when people criticize me. I do have secret feelings of insecurity and shame. I often feel vulnerable and I feel easily humiliated. That’s something very personal that I never share with anyone because I don’t trust they won’t use that information against me at some point. I never talk about anything negative that has happened to me earlier in my career because I don’t want the other person to think I’m damaged goods or dysfunctional. I don’t typically trust anyone.

82  M.-L. GERMAIN

How NPD Leaders Perceive Others NPD leaders divide the world into two types of people: the winners (the famous, rich and great) and the losers (the mediocre and worthless). This division defines the NPD leader worldview (Burgo 2015). Unable to tolerate not being part of the winner category, narcissists will exploit the “losers” and use them to maintain their superior status. In essence, NPD individuals will boost their self-image at the expense of their victims. If anyone should dare to challenge their self-image of perfection, they will be met with viciousness and deceit. Narcissists find it much easier to destroy others than to rethink their own integrity. They utilize power to destroy the spiritual growth of others to serve their purpose of defending and preserving their own integrity. To accomplish this goal of self-preservation, narcissists will often scapegoat people less powerful than them, that is, individuals who are weak, defenseless, trapped, and not powerful enough to escape. NPD leaders use their status and power to intimidate and bully employees. This behavior eventually turns collaborators into adversaries. In general, bullies choose to victimize others in order to avoid being victimized themselves. Bullies by nature, narcissists victimize anyone who lacks the power or strength to escape their claws. Generally, it is easier to deny one’s own pain than it is to acknowledge it, a concept that fuels bullying. Casting their pain onto others through projection or scapegoating allows narcissists to deny their own guilt, ignore the painful awareness of their inadequacies, avoid feelings of shame, and deny their own imperfections. The narcissistic bully unconsciously unburdens their painful sense of being damaged goods by forcing their victims to feel it instead. “I’m not the loser, you are,” is the overall mentality. By persecuting others, the narcissistic bully gets rid of their own loser self and is convinced that they are the winner. Narcissistic individuals have a difficult time understanding the needs and feelings of others. They believe that others should act in a way similar to themselves. If the behavior of others deviates from the narcissist’s expectations, they often become angry or even enraged. Since the narcissist is aware that others don’t always comply with their wishes, she has developed formidable manipulative skills in order to achieve her personal goals. As seen throughout this book, these manipulation skills might include forms of praise, intimidation, playing the martyr, guilt tripping and threats. NPD individuals will choose the most effective technique that they feel will work on the person in a given situation. Once

5  HOW NPD LEADERS PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AND OTHERS 

83

a manipulation technique has been decided upon, the narcissist will employ it and continue to bully her victim until achieving the desired outcome (Payson 2002) while being void of empathy. From Charm to Rage As previously mentioned, NPD individuals excel at projecting a falsely perfect image to others. Requiring a considerable amount of energy, narcissists routinely “steel” themselves to face a workday and only become their true narcissistic selves again upon leaving the office. In other words, their work persona is often the opposite of their home persona, similar to the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. NPD individuals may be charming and funny while at work but they can display quite despicable behaviors at home. They may never take a penny from a coworker but may conveniently forget their promise to ever reimburse their partner. Often, narcissists will make it a priority to uphold their promises and obligations with co-workers but repeatedly break promises or obligations made to family members. They may be perceived as highly communicative at work, yet behave antagonistically, engage in stonewalling, or provoke incessant arguments at home. The NPD individual often appears neat and tidy at work but acts carelessly at home, expecting his or her partner to take care of the menial chores that they view as being below their worth. Behaviors such as these are referred to as splitting and are generally so ingrained in the NPD leader that they are likely unaware of such extreme personality and behavioral divergences. The only thing that they are actually aware of is that they had a terribly difficult or incredibly wonderful day at work. They often believe that their experiences or stories are far more important than anyone else in their household. While anger is a common trait of narcissists, they may be able to contain themselves all day at work only to then lash out at their partner who becomes their emotional punching bag at home. NPD individuals often initiate relationships and elicit interest from others by exuding undeniable charm. However, they tend to lose interest relatively quickly, especially after getting what they wanted out of the relationship or simply by becoming bored with it. An NPD individual can be very engaging as long as their desires and needs are being fulfilled. Always boasting a sense of superiority, the NPD person believes that they are eternally the captain on a ship full of fools. Yet, individuals with NPD often have a history of failed personal and work relationships,

84  M.-L. GERMAIN

secondary to disappointment that the relationship is not giving them the gratification that they longed-for or fulfilling their missing self-object needs (Muslin 1985). NPD leaders endure a great deal of suffering. Kohut describes the depression and anxiety that a narcissistic patient may feel as “the deepest anxiety a man can experience” (Baker and Baker 1987). A leader who is concerned about possibly having NPD traits who makes the decision to seek professional advice is a strength and a general indication that she has a healthy sense of self. In addition to personal traits, it may be the awareness of the harm they inflict on others and their degree of functioning. Alas, NPD leaders who are high on the narcissism traits spectrum will rarely have such realization (or feel the need to change) and will therefore dismiss the need to seek the help of an external consultant.

References Ainsworth, M. S., & Bowlby, J. (1991). An ethological approach to personality development. American Psychologist, 46(4), 333. Baker, M., & Baker, H. (1987). Heinz Kohut’s self psychology: An overview. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144(1), 1–9. Bowlby, J. (2005). A secure base: Clinical applications of attachment theory (Vol. 393). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Burgo, J. (2015). The Narcissist you know: Defending yourself against extreme Narcissists in an all-about-me age. New York, NY: Touchstone. Germain, M. L. (2011). Formal mentoring relationships and attachment theory: Implications for human resource development. Human Resource Development Review, 10(2), 123–150. Miller, A. (1996). Prisoners of childhood: The Drama of the Gifted Child. New York, NY: Basic Books. Muslin, H. L. (1985). Heinz Kohut: Beyond the pleasure principle, contributions to psychoanalysis (pp. 203–230). Beyond Freud: A study of modern psychoanalytic theorists. Payson, E. D. (2002). The Wizard of Oz and other Narcissists: Coping with the oneway relationship in work, love, and family. Royal Oak, MI: Julian Day Publications. Peck, M. S. (1983). People of the lie: The hope for healing human evil. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Ronningstam, E. F. (Ed.). (1998). Disorders of narcissism: Diagnostic, clinical, and empirical implications (pp. 29–51). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association, xxv, 483 p. Schulte, H. M., Hall, M. J., & Crosby, R. (1994). Violence in patients with narcissistic personality pathology: Observations of a clinical series. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 48(4), 610–623.

PART III

Practice: Practical Solutions for Those Who Work with NPD Corporate Leaders

CHAPTER 6

Considerations for HR, Consultants, and Organizational Psychologists

Abstract  After focusing on specific tools that both individuals and organizations can use when working with NPD leaders, Germain highlights techniques that HR, consultants, and organizational psychologists can use to detect signs of distress in employees who may be affected by a coworker with NPD, before offering strategies to help those distressed employees cope. Germain forewarns of potential NPD behaviors that HR professionals may notice at the time of recruitment. She then provides examples of legal considerations to take into account when working with employees with NPD, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act. The chapter ends with an overview of workplace bullying and employee harassment. Keywords  Tools for working with NPD leaders · Tools for Human Resources, consultants, organizational psychologists · Signs of distress in victims and coping strategies · Leader recruitment · Legal considerations · Workplace bullying and employee harassment The workplace presents specific limitations when dealing with employee behaviors. The breadth of employee behaviors has the potential to affect all aspects of our work. Although these behaviors can be destructive to the work environment and to employees, behavioral matters carry a stigma. They are generally considered to be someone’s private domain. Aside from exploring the limitations that exist when dealing with employee behaviors, this chapter presents some legal considerations Human Resources © The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_6

87

88  M.-L. GERMAIN

professionals and management should know about. It is important to recognize that although it is their duty to ensure the well-being of employees, Human Resources (HR) professionals are not typically trained in behavioral sciences and are therefore not in a position to serve as organizational behavioral therapists. What HR professionals are empowered to do revolves around enforcing company policy, focusing on the importance of mutual respect, and making external resources available and known to employees.

Detecting abusive Signs in Leaders and Signs of Distress in Subordinates Everyday Employees affected by the narcissistic behaviors of a colleague likely experience unhappiness in their job, which may be expressed by dreading going to work, feeling alienated, having unusually high numbers of tardiness and/or absences, feeling regularly sick, or experiencing weight loss or weight gain. Other manifestations may involve loss of sleep or unusual aches and pains, resultant of a weaker immune system (neck pain, back pain, flu, and so on). At Work Employees’ who interact with an NPD leader may feel that their ideas are often ignored or dismissed. They will likely be made to feel useless in the NPD leader’s presence, may feel like they are being grilled, talked down to, insulted (alone or in front of others), inflicted with sardonic comments or simply ignored. If displeased, an NPD leader may walk away from a conversation. Also, it is not unusual for NPD leaders to take credit for the work of others. While employees are likely very aware that they are affected by their bosses’ behaviors, they may not understand the reason behind these behaviors or how to precisely describe them. One method employees can employ to determine whether they might be working with an NPD individual consists in asking themselves specific questions. The following questions were adapted from Payson’s (2002) questionnaire for relevance to a workplace setting. The use of the pronoun “her” is arbitrary and for the purpose of simplification. The reader should note that these questions are not meant to diagnose an individual; Rather, they are meant to be the starting point of further exploration.

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

89

1. Do you often feel that you only exist for the purpose of listening to or admiring your boss’s extraordinary skills and talents? 2. Are easily irritated or hurt when you do not receive a turn? 3. Do feel as if your boss maintains too serious a level of pride? Do you feel hesitant to give your opinion when you know your opinion will be different from hers? 4. Do you frequently feel that the outcome of your conversation rests solely on her current mood? 5. Do you feel as if she controls you? 6. Do you fear that you will anger her, face retaliation from her, or be cut off by her? 7. Do you struggle to say no? 8. Does the relationship drain you or are you worried that it is going to drain your energy? 9. Do you feel lonely in your work relationship with her? 10. Do you ponder where you stand in regard to your working relationship with her? 11. Do you notice yourself doubting what’s real? 12. Do you frequently feel frustrated, angry, or resentful after communicating with her? 13. Do you increasingly experience a mix of feelings, such as anxiety, intimidation, powerlessness, or inadequacy? 14. Are you feeling set up as a scapegoat? For questions more centered around work duties, employees should also ask themselves the following: 15. Are you staying because you know what you currently have but you don’t know what you’d get if you were to work somewhere else? 16. Are you reluctant to transfer to another department or quit your job because you feel protective of her? 17. Are you staying in your job and working with her because of your investment of time and energy? 18. Do you have a sense that your credibility and competence in her eyes and in the eyes of others is being undermined? 19. Are work performance expectations often changing? And are you given conflicting messages about your work duties and performance expectations?

90  M.-L. GERMAIN

20. Are you receiving a fraction of the support that you provide her or work recognition that you deserve? 21.  Has your advancement been halted by an unfair performance review or the endless delay of a review? If an employee is experiencing several of the feelings described in the questions above after interacting with a colleague, they may be dealing with someone who has narcissist traits. If so, it is wise that the employee sets firm boundaries and utilizes various accountability strategies, as presented in the next paragraphs. Many of the above questions reflect behavior in which one cares for another employee at his own expense. While some individuals are more prone to be attracted to NPDs, anyone can be pulled into such care-taking behaviors, especially with superiors and in a work setting. Most of us do not expect to have to collaborate with someone who is outright rude or dishonest and such interactions will likely take us by surprise. We may instinctively question if the interaction actually happened. We may ask ourselves, Did she really just tell me that I was incompetent? We may also tend to blame ourselves, telling ourselves that, Maybe I’m not as well versed on the topic, after all. Furthermore, we may deny or dismiss that the incident ever occurred at all. If abusive interactions with a specific colleague become a pattern, they must be addressed. One challenge the employee affected by these behaviors may encounter is that NPD leaders often portray a perfect image to the outside word, leaving the employee to feel isolated and/or alienated. Those who fall victim to an NPD leader’s abuse may even go as far as to question their own sanity. This phenomenon is superbly demonstrated in the classic movie Gaslight (1944). According to psychologists Gary Namie and Ruth Namie (2009), gaslighting and bullying behaviors include: • Blaming others for one’s mistakes • Making unreasonable job demands • Criticizing an employee and/or his/her ability • Applying company policies inconsistently to punish an employee • Threatening to discipline or fire an employee • Insulting or putting employees down by screaming at them or physically threatening them • Discounting or ignoring an employee’s work accomplishments; stealing ideas

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

91

• Purposely excluding employees from work or social activities and meetings • All-or-nothing approach to work quality • Rarely (if ever) apologizing for wrongdoing Another challenge is the fear to challenge a superior’s behavior. Subordinates of an NPD leader will often avoid conflict as a dispute with a boss may place their job in jeopardy. Such employees may choose to ignore the NPD leader’s behavior or attempt to side with them. Stopping the subordinate’s internal disturbance may only be achieved by seeking external validation from a credible person that is able to offer a counterweight to the criticism and blame that is received from the NPD leader (Payson 2002). A person who retains healthy coping mechanisms for dealing with psychological pain is generally able to self-reflect while a character-disordered person is essentially unable to self-reflect on her problems, expecting others to take responsibility instead. Consequently, the deep-rooted and intense disturbance of an NPD leader is observed by the purposeful pain that she inflicts upon others, especially subordinates who she perceives as being the most vulnerable. The character-disordered person is so disturbed that she is unable to recognize her personal issues while, conversely, the subordinate struggles to recognize his strengths. Whereas an NPD leader needs no assistance in recognizing her own strengths and capabilities, a subordinate who has fallen victim to narcissistic behaviors may need advice on how to identify personal strengths. He is likely unaware that recognizing his difficult situation is in itself a strength, not a weakness. The subordinate of an NPD leader may feel constantly guarded, not knowing when the next put down or expression of hostile behavior will occur. They may function solely in “survival mode,” caring more about self-preservation from the NPD leader’s unpredictable attacks rather than performing their necessary job duties.

Strategies to Cope with Narcissistic Corporate Leader Behaviors Tools for People There is a threefold approach to surviving an extreme narcissistic colleague: First, protecting oneself; second, making the NPD leader aware of her behavior; and third, setting goals that are then reevaluated for

92  M.-L. GERMAIN

improvement. If no improvement has been made, a formal appeal to a superior or the Human Resources department is in order. If the manager is the narcissist in question, one should not hesitate to contact the Human Resources Department. These strategies presented in this chapter are not “quick fixes.” At best, assuming that the NPD leader is not an extreme case, the suggested techniques may prompt the leader to drop a couple of points on the NPD spectrum, allowing for a more tolerable work relationship. However, if the NPD leader does fall under the extreme category, they will not likely be employed for a long period of time. Commonly, extreme narcissists hop from one job to another, abruptly changing industries and/or physical job locations. In the few studies about coping with narcissistic colleagues (DuBrin 2012; Namie and Namie 2009; Wesner 2007), employees reported five strategies they most frequently used: 1. Ignoring 2. Confronting 3. Befriending 4. Informing management or the human resources department 5. Transferring to another department or resigning Ignoring Malkin (2015) suggests that ignoring the behavior of an extreme narcissist often creates more problems than it solves. When victims keep a low profile, it often propels the NPD leader to be more worried about her own performance, in turn, triggering visible arrogance and more abuse toward others. In essence, silence endorses the NPD leader behavior and encourages further abuse. Confronting Ideally, the effects of destructive leadership can be minimized by aligning the NPD leader with a colleague who can keep them anchored to reality (Maccoby 2000). Alas, this is not always possible. Malkin (2015) posits that confrontation does not necessarily bring about resolution. Criticizing an NPD’s manners (“You keep interrupting people”) or pointing out her flaws (“Your argument is unfounded”) tends to worsen things. Since most employees are not comfortable criticizing their boss, avoiding this type of confrontation is fairly easy. NPD leaders

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

93

are incapable of receiving honest feedback. Rather, they become angry and aggressive with the notion of being imperfect. Telling a narcissistic colleague that they are ruthless or manipulative will unlikely result in positive behavior changes, especially if the individual ranks high on the narcissism scale. Instead, it will be perceived as derogatory and insulting, likely resulting in either setting the narcissist off or having little effect on her. In fact, truth-telling may result in more verbal lashing and antagonize the NPD individual. If an NPD leader considers a colleague to be a threat, such as feeling that a colleague is attempting to reveal the leader’s true narcissistic self, the leader will likely attempt to damage the colleague’s career. It is important that employees do not let behaviors by the NPD leader such as being ignored, feeling disrespected, dismissed, demeaned, or bullied trigger them as it may ultimately compromise their professionalism. Selecting an appropriate coping strategy is of crucial to maintaining the colleague’s emotional well-being and career. Done adroitly, addressing the problem includes making the NPD leader aware of and accountable for their behaviors. If the NPD leader challenges a subordinate’s judgment or their ability to perform workrelated tasks without offering any specific examples, the subordinate should ask for further explanation regarding the NPD’s concerns. While blocking the pass may enrage the NPD leader, it gives her a chance to self-reflect on her behavior. Research has shown that it is far more effective to focus on rare moments when the NPD leader expresses care, concern, or empathy for others. The more an NPD leader believes that they are able to rely on work relationships for feeling good, the less likely they will be to exhibit narcissistic behaviors.Reminding the NPD individual of the importance of your working relationship may help them slide down the spectrum of narcissism (Malkin 2015). If the colleague opts for making the NPD leader accountable for her behaviors and respectful toward him, it is necessary to assess over time whether efforts have resulted in any positive changes. This assessment requires that detailed notes are maintained regarding one’s feelings before these efforts began. Questions to ask oneself during include: Has the situation changed for the better? What in particular has improved? Is the employee feeling more valued? Is his opinion heard during meetings? Has the downplaying of accomplishments decreased? If the goal was to not to be afraid to go to work/to be more productive/to feel

94  M.-L. GERMAIN

more valued/to be less criticized by the NPD leader, has this goal been achieved? If no improvement has occurred, the employee should consider turning to the Human Resources Department. Employees should remember that for the NPD leader, getting ahead in their career prevails over getting along with co-workers—after all, they have rarely been successful in doing the latter. If the leader can be convinced that getting along with others will further their goals, you may be in business. Because NPD leaders work very well by setting goals, reminding them of the benefits that positive business relationships produce in terms of reaching their goals can be an effective way to strengthen such bonds. The employee must first determine whether this approach is worth their personal and professional investment; the employee’s self-care should remain a priority, even if the professional loss of leaving the department is considerable. Befriending the NPD leader Employees working with an NPD leader should attempt to highlight the benefits of collaboration, focusing on how the NPD leader can benefit from said collaboration. Although it may seem counterintuitive, offering an outpouring of support and kindness toward the NPD leader may assist in polishing rough edges and deepening the narcissist’s commitment to a working relationship. NPD individuals are all too accustomed to being abandoned by others, which lends itself to the theory that not quitting one’s job (as long as staying does not damage one’s self or career) may increase the outpouring of respect seen from the NPD leader. Integrating pronouns such as we, us, and our project into daily exchanges may make them more apt to help you. However, since NPD individuals tend to focus on personal advancement and success, reactivating their blocked empathy, concern, and consideration for others may prove challenging. A good measure of an NPD leader’s susceptibility to opening up channels of empathy and consideration may be to try and persuade the NPD leader to agree that a given work situation is quite stressful. If the NPD leader does not agree, it may be difficult to nudge them from their high score on the NPD spectrum. Seizing any given moment where the NPD leader behaves communally may be another strategy that colleagues can employ in order to help move the NPD leader to the center of the spectrum. Pointing out and showing appreciation for the times that the NPD leader works

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

95

collaboratively and/or shows an interest in other people may be enough encouragement for these positive behaviors to be repeated. It is important to recognize that the occasional emphasis on a good work behavior differs significantly from constant unwarranted flattery, which simply feeds into narcissistic behaviors. Alternatively, calmly pointing out instances where the NPD leader was disrespectful or demeaning may help promote behavioral self-awareness, though it may be best to sandwich negative feedback inside of positive commentary. For instance, one may express to the NPD leader that people left last week’s meeting very encouraged by the leader’s feedback, but at today’s meeting, people were less enthusiastic about the future of the project when they were told that their work was substandard. Befriending the NPD leader has its limitations, as NPD individuals are rarely able to maintain long-term friendships. The oversharing of feelings (such as “I’m sad, afraid, scared”) may not be a wise strategy either as the NPD leader may choose to use them against you. The NPD leader may deem you as “weak” for expressing such feelings in the work environment. If the leader is particularly manipulative or sadistic, she may shame you and disclose your feelings and personal information to others. Colleagues of NPD leaders should remember that most constructive feedback will be received with defensiveness and a distortion of their intentions. Dealing effectively with an NPD individual in the workplace often requires that employees protect themselves by setting boundaries and making pointed requests. Although the NPD leader may consider such boundaries or requests to be “threats,” with the support of Human resources, subordinates should not hesitate to set realistic and fair demands. Protecting oneself starts with the tedious act of documenting everything. Emails sent and received often become “Exhibit Number 1” when it comes to demonstrating the existence of a hostile work environment, retaliation, discrimination, unfair disciplinary actions, violations of employee privacy, and so on. The tone or how something is said in an email may be vital in supporting harassment cases. A subordinate may tell his NPD leader that he intends to document all verbal attacks. The NPD leader may trespass and even ignore these boundaries when they feel as though these boundaries have been imposed against her will. The leader will likely test these boundaries and attempt to invalidate them, especially if the colleague begins to break

96  M.-L. GERMAIN

down and show weakness in his convictions. Therefore, it imperative to remain firm and remind the NPD leader of the predetermined boundaries. Again, it is essential to save all exchanges and paperwork proving that the colleague adhered to the appropriate steps and maintained his job responsibilities. He should write down verbatim the insults and putdowns that were exchanged, when and where they were said, and who was present. It is also important to keep records regarding threats of termination. Because office computers are company property and can be accessed at any time, it is advised to keep these records on a personal computer outside the workplace to ensure that employees’ data are not compromised. Employees should remain focused on the task at hand, as meeting or exceeding the job requirements will help prove that the NPD leader’s putdowns and disapprovals are unjustified. This pointed behavior gives the employee an opportunity to respectfully ask the NPD leader what was expected of them, while knowing that they have already met the objectives of the task. The term “respectfully” is essential. NDP leaders are quick to turn a situation around and say that their colleague was rude or noncompliant. In essence, it is a common occurrence for NPD leaders to project their behavior onto others. Contacting Management and/or the Human Resources Department Human Resources Departments are often ill-equipped to deal with complex employee behavioral situations. If there is insufficient documentation supporting the NPD leader’s wrongdoing, a complaint about her behavior may be dismissed. In 2008, Gary Namie and Ruth Namie conducted a study involving 400 respondents regarding workplace bullying. In 31% of the complaints filed, HR conducted inadequate investigations resulting in no negative consequences for the bully but with plenty of negative consequences for the claimant. In 62% of cases, when employers were made aware of the bullying, nothing occurred (p. 300) and the complaints were never even investigated. Based on these findings, the authors concluded, “Don’t trust HR. They work for management and are management.” (p. 231) Although this particular study showed otherwise, many organizations do in fact take complaints quite seriously and will perform full investigations. Employees may also be granted access to an ombudsperson, whose role is to provide counsel regarding appropriate means to proceed.

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

97

This person reviews the evidence gathered and may report the problem to upper management while keeping the name of the employee confidential, though employees should always inquire about the conditions for privacy. Regardless of privacy conditions, if a case ends up in court, the information shared with the ombudsperson will likely be disclosed. Generally speaking, it is best to not share mental health history, such as depression or anxiety, as a judge may conclude that the employee was overly sensitive to feedback or unable to fulfill his work obligations. Other research studies suggest that employees who choose to inform management of workplace issues or choose to resign rarely regret their decision. However, those who ignored, confronted, or befriended their narcissistic colleague rather than reporting behavior did in fact experience feelings of regret, likely because their actions led to no resolution. Oftentimes, ignoring a narcissist’s behavior can be dangerous because it silently endorses their abusive behaviors, giving the NPD individual a passport to not only continue, but possibly increase the intensity of the abuse. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, confronting the narcissist and pointing out their mistakes will often worsen negative behaviors as NPD individuals cannot tolerate being flawed. Honest feedback may only serve to exacerbate expressions of anger, aggression, and ultimately result in severe verbal lashings, not to mention that confronting one’s boss is not easy in the first place. If an employee chooses to file a formal complaint though HR, he should gather solid documentation of the NPD leader’s abuse toward him. Documentation should include emails, texts, and detailed descriptions of specific incidents. Although other employees might be reluctant to participate in a formal complaint, they may agree to serve as witnesses, assuming that confidentiality is guaranteed. Transferring to Another Department or Resigning In some cases, employees who work with extreme narcissistic co-workers and have not been helped by management or HR should consider exiting the work relationship, if possible. Some clear signs that one should exit a narcissistic work relationship are: • Emotional abuse and physical threats. • The NPD leader is in denial (she lacks self-awareness and cannot admit that there is something wrong with her behavior). • A pattern of remorseless lies and deceit, which can be a sign of extreme psychopathy.

98  M.-L. GERMAIN

• Realizing that the NPD leader is too destructive and/or possesses traits that are too severe to continue the work relationship, as continuing to work with her would require sacrificing personal needs and sense of self. The decision to exit a work relationship is dependent on several factors. One must evaluate the severity of the distress that they feel. Ideally, one shouldn’t feel distressed because of mistreatment by a coworker in the first place. The decision whether to file a formal complaint through HR or to leave the department is a very personal one. Filing a complaint exposes the leader’s abuse toward the employee, which in turn, damages the NPD’s reputation. Although this may bring the employee a sense of justice, they run the risk that mistreatment from the NPD leader will only intensify, as shown in one of the case studies presented in Chap. 7. Employees who do not have the option of leaving the department or organization where the NPD leader works are especially prone to stress. These employees may feel trapped. They need to focus on learning survival techniques that will allow them to preserve their well-being and career until their next job. Regardless of the chosen approach, when employees realize that they are working for or with a person who causes them distress, they should reach out to trustworthy people in their life such as a family member, a friend, or even a trusted colleague. Having a sounding board is crucial for validating one’s feelings, though it is important to ensure that the confider is trustworthy and remains supportive. Not seeking outside help increases the feeling of isolation and alienation, potentially causing one to doubt their own sanity. If the victim is open to seeking professional help, they should. Some organizations’ benefits packages include Employee Assistance Programs through which employees can place anonymous calls to a therapist or a social worker. These calls may serve as a first step toward healing. i- “Post Narcissist Stress Disorder”: What employees can expect Employees who have worked with an NPD leader may experience shock and confusion upon realizing that they were merely a means to an end rather than the valuable and smart employees that the NPD leader initially claimed that they were. The NPD leader’s defenses are often shocking, escaping never-ending work responsibilities by blaming the employees’ “inadequate work behaviors.” For instance, the NPD leader may wrongfully declare that an employee is emotionally unstable and/

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

99

or incompetent to complete given job duties.The leader will likely find fault in the employee, further triggering feelings of inadequacy and perpetuating confusion as the employee is increasingly demeaned by the NPD leader. While the employee will likely have questions as to what prompted such ill-treatment, he may feel the need to further accommodate the NPD leader for the purpose of self-preservation. At this point, the attacked employee has learned to dodge the NPD leader’s critical attacks by avoiding all communication and interaction that he believes may result in a conflict. After lowering his expectations, the employee may see an improvement in the interactions with the NPD leader, however, by now the leader has clearly cemented the dynamics of the relationship—she is firmly in control. While the employee will likely reflect upon where things went wrong and how to correct the issues, the NPD leader may simultaneously claim that the employee is hysterical, unbalanced, overactive, or insane, ultimately intensifying their devaluation. Suddenly, the employee feels less competent, less smart, and less important and will likely slowly withdraw and avoid communication in an effort to preserve his emotional well-being and job. When referring to traumatic events such car accidents or natural disasters, it is understood that most of these events have a time-limited duration. In some cases, however, people may experience trauma in a chronic fashion, meaning that it is unremittingly felt for months or even years. The challenge with the current PTSD diagnosis is that it often does not adequately capture the severe psychological harm as a result of prolonged trauma. Additional symptoms that occur alongside PTSD symptoms, such as changes in one’s self-concept or the manner in which one adapts to stressful events, are often reported by people who have experienced chronic trauma. In 1997, Judith Herman, a Harvard University professor, coined the term Complex PTSD (C-PTSD) in order to better define symptoms that are commonly seen with long-term trauma. Results from the DSM-IV Field Trials suggested that 92% of individuals with Complex PTSD simultaneously met diagnostic criteria for PTSD, resulting in Complex PTSD not being added into a separate diagnosis classification (Roth et al. 1997). It is important to note, however, that cases involving prolonged or repeated trauma may indeed require special treatment considerations. When long-term trauma occurs, victims generally exist in captivity, either physically or emotionally (Herman 1997). With situations such as these, the victim remains controlled by the perpetrator and is likely

100  M.-L. GERMAIN

unable to escape imminent danger. Examples of possible traumatic situations include being held as a prisoner of war camps, long-term child abuse, and long-term domestic violence. Long term is defined as several months to several years. An employee who endured chronic victimization and total control by an NPD leader may experience the following difficulties: • Emotional Regulation: feelings of obstinate sadness, unsafe displays of anger, suicidal thinking, or suppressed anger. • Consciousness: includes the failing to recall or re-experiencing traumatic events, feels removed from personal mental processes, feelings of being disassociated with one’s body. • Self-Perception: includes feelings of incapability, accusation, blame, ignominy, or a sense of being entirely unlike other people. • Distorted Perceptions of the Perpetrator: witnessed in accrediting complete control to the perpetrator, a preoccupation with one’s relationship with the wrongdoer, or being consumed with thoughts of vengeance. • Relations with Others: isolation from others, lack of trust, or continually seeking out a rescuer. • One’s System of Meanings: includes a loss of faith or feelings of desperation and anguish. The feelings that trauma survivors experience may be so overwhelming that they can cause avoidance and resistance to discussing trauma-related topics. Trauma survivors use a variety of coping mechanisms, such as numbing feelings through alcohol and substance abuse, or engaging in self-mutilation or other means of self-harm. Often, survivors are mistakenly labeled as having a “weak character” or are unfairly blamed for the symptoms that they exhibit as a result of the victimization that they have endured. Knowing the Signs of Post-Traumatic Stress (PTS) A person who has endured extensive exposure to narcissistic abuse may experience several of the symptoms listed below, with the length of abuse, natural resilience, and sensitivity levels all impacting the degree to which the victim experiences the symptoms. • Re-living acts or aggression and/or comments made by the NPD leader, including bad dreams and nightmares.

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

101

• Hypersensitivity manifested by struggling to sleep, easily frightened, difficulty concentrating, and expressions of sudden anger. • Anxiety seen by living in a constant state of fight-or-flight mode, in turn, leading to complete physical and/or emotional fatigue, ultimately manifesting as various illnesses and medical conditions of the body. • Environmental stimuli triggering traumatic memories, ranging from visual, auditory, or olfactory triggers (i.e., specific office spaces, scents, or voices which are often associated with traumatic events or the specific NPD leader). • Repetition Compulsion witnessed by victim seeking closure by reenacting specified events (in accordance with the idea that people re-abuse themselves after their abuser is gone). Re-abuse may take the form of stalking abuser online or engaging in negative self-talk. Essentially, the victim attempts to complete an unfinished job, generally leading to enhanced PTSD symptoms because this coping mechanism does not effectively heal trauma. Impact of PTSD When left untreated, PTSD and C-PTSD commonly trigger other conditions and/or symptoms, affecting all areas of the victim’s life. Possible conditions include: • Difficulty handling stress • Various eating disorders • Damaged relationships with others, both at home and at work • Depression • Addiction to drugs and/or alcohol • Specified anxiety disorders including panic attacks and phobias(i.e.stalking victims often develop agoraphobia) • Lower self-esteem • Possible career loss often due to a loss of desire to be productive • Self-inflicted injury or in extreme cases, suicide In instances of extreme abuse by an NPD colleague, victims may consider terminating their lives. A large body of research has linked workplace bullying and work-related suicide (Germain 2014). Although rare, these extreme situations do occur and occasionally picked up by the media. In February 2017, for instance, a Dairy Queen manager in

102  M.-L. GERMAIN

Missouri was charged with manslaughter after a bullied teen employee committed suicide. In the USA alone, work-related suicides increased by 22.2% between 1995 and 2010 and increased again by 8% between 2012 and 2013, making suicide a leading cause of death (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2012, 2016; Germain 2014). Because organizations are not required to officially report losses of employees’ life as “suicides,” and because occupational suicides undeniably tarnish a company’s image, it is difficult to estimate the number of lives lost because of workplace abuse. The loss incurred is first and foremost a human one. It is also a financial cost, not just because the employee has left the organization permanently, but also because of the effects such loss has on the employee’s co-workers’ mental health, motivation level, and productivity. Employees who have been victims (or witnesses) of narcissistic abuse may find it useful to consult with a qualified health professional who can offer guidance through the recovery process. Recovery from Complex PTSD requires an intense restoration of control and power for the traumatized person (Herman 1997). By creating safety through healed relationships, allowing for remembrance and mourning and by promoting reconnection with everyday life, survivors can once again become empowered. As victims strive to forgive both the NPD leader and themselves while still acknowledging the betrayal and hurt they experienced, they will eventually be able to look at their work relationship with the NPD leader through an objective lens. Attaining this level of forgiveness means procuring enough empathy and understanding in order to feel genuine compassion toward the NPD leader, in addition to sustaining an unyielding compassion for the victim (Payson 2002). Surprisingly, NPD leaders themselves may also experience signs of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. A 2005 empirical study by Bachar, Hadar, and Shalev focused on the role that narcissistic traits and narcissistic susceptibility play in regard to the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In the four months following a traumatic event, 144 survivors were observed and assessed for symptoms of PTSD. During week 1, patients were given the Narcissistic Vulnerability Scale, a self-reported rating scale used for the purpose of assessing the degree of severity experienced during traumatic events and/or the resulting symptoms based on the event such as depression, intrusions, evading, or provocation. Following the initial vulnerability scale, patients were interviewed on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale and once again

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

103

given the self-rating symptoms scale. It was determined that patients who developed serious (1 month) and chronic (4 months) PTSD displayed pointedly higher stages of narcissistic susceptibility within the first week of assessment. The authors concluded that narcissistic vulnerabilities contribute to the occurrence of PTSD. The prospect of having to work with someone who shows overt or covert signs of narcissism can be daunting, if not downright depressing. Even more depressing is the idea that NPD exists as a fixed character flaw or personality trait with little to no chance of improving (Malkin 2015). The only possibility for growth and change largely depends on the severity of the narcissism (Payson 2002). The potential for an NPD leader to change greatly depends on the individual’s awareness and her inherent level of motivation for such change. If we consider narcissism as a learned response and a habit, its intensity is a function of circumstances. The Appendix section includes a list of organizations that provide assistance to victims of narcissistic abuse. Tools for Organizations Tools for Human Resources Professionals Whether it is in the form of bullying, intimidation or violence, hostile behaviors are on the rise and are becoming an issue in the workplace. Even if the hostile behavior occurs off the job or electronically, it still results in workplace problems. There are various types of hostile, intimidating and threatening behaviors and there are many applicable laws, which add to the complexity of defining and dealing with these issues. It is critical that organizations address employees’ hostile behaviors. The courts have expanded the scope of an organization’s duty of care for the overall work environment. Also, the US Supreme Court has recently ruled that private and public organizations have a Duty of Care which is owed to employees, clients, and customers. Employees who make threats or do harm to co-workers or property can create catastrophic consequences, which can be prevented. Threats of violence require immediate action but many organizations are ill-prepared to address these situations. They do not have in place the policies, training, or understanding of the overall practices and processes which can be used to prevent, identify, act and deal with the aftermath of an employee’s violent acts.

104  M.-L. GERMAIN

Organizations and HR should gain a clear understanding of the following topics: • What is intimidation, bullying, and abusive behavior? • What constitutes employee emotional abuse? • What is violence? (The definition is broad) • Laws affecting the organization’s liability and ability to control • Policies that help prevent or control intimidation, bullying, and violence • The ADA Direct Threat Standard • Duty of Care • The Qualified Privilege—someone’s immunity for addressing issues • Advance preparation • Steps to take in a crisis situation • Security issues and interaction with law enforcement • Creating a fast action response team • Necessary incident documentation Prevalent traits of NPD may include mistrust and sociopathic tendencies, both of which are likely to compound existing problems, causing significant issues for the HR professionals. Unfortunately, in most cases, support from HR personnel and/or supervisors will not likely offer any benefits. Typically, the NPD employee’s inflexible and obstinate attitude will ultimately lead to termination (Farnsworth and Ella 2015). As aforementioned, human resources professionals are neither trained nor equipped with the necessary tools to assess personality disorders of employees, nor should they be expected to solve complex behaviorally anchored issues. Yet, the negative effects of NPD leadership can cause too much damage to organizations and their employees to be ignored. Not intervening when a complaint is filed against an NPD leader is an inadvertent endorsement of negative behavior. The cooperation with agreeable co-workers only reinforces the NPD leader’s disordered behavior (American Psychiatric Association 2000) and may prove to be detrimental to the organization (Kets de Vries 1993a; Padilla and Mulvey 2008). Although most large US organizations have anti-harassment and grievance policies enforced, many studies have shown the negative outcomes for employees who file harassment complaints (Bergman et al. 2002). Jenkins (2011) reports that the majority of complaints filed are received with no follow-up, resulting in the perpetrator escaping

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

105

any feedback or pertinent coaching. Furthermore, organizations tend to focus on restorative measures rather than punitive ones in order to address complaints (Salin 2008). In doing so, HR professionals may choose to classify certain complaints as personality clashes or conflicts rather than substantial emotional harassment complaints (Ferris 2004). Because human resources professionals are tasked with representing both the employee and the organization, handling such complaints tends to be a very delicate matter. Being advocates and experts of workforce management, HR professionals must maintain an innate understanding that productivity is directly affected by employee morale and overall wellbeing. As seen in earlier chapters, NPD leader behaviors can be an occupational health and safety issue. The manner in which abusive treatment is handled sets the standard for future mistreatments. HR managers have the potential to be catalysts of positive change in organizations. When bad behaviors cross the line and turn into abuse, neither the organization, nor the individual, bear the responsibility for the problems that ensue (Malkin 2015). In some instances, NPD leaders are liabilities for their employers, as it is largely the employer’s responsibility to stop employee harassment and bullying. Abusive behaviors may require legal intervention, meaning that HR professionals should carefully document all interactions with employees who have been reported for using abusive tactics. HR should be aware that itis not uncommon for an NPD individual to challenge records or documents in an attempt to make a victim look incompetent. Of course, HR professionals should provide NPD leaders with reasonable opportunities to repair bruised relationships with co-workers but they ought to stand firm on setting clear goals for improvement. When dealing with a conflict between an NPD leader and a victim who may have filed a complaint, HR professionals should be mindful of remaining neutral and fair at all times. Perceptions of organizational justice generally exist as a fundamental value. Questionable fairness can have detrimental consequences on employee behaviors, insolences, health, and performance expectations (Bies and Tripp 1996; Konovsky 2000; Jenkins 2011). The perception of injustice often contributes to higher levels of absence, lower overall health, psychological distress, and even depression (Ylipaavalniemi et al. 2005). From an economic standpoint, perception of employee injustice greatly influences the number of lawsuits filed against employers as well as the monetary compensation of claims that follow a workplace-related injury (Winefield et al. 2010) or claims for wrongful

106  M.-L. GERMAIN

termination (Lind et al. 2000). What is unknown, however, is the impact of that emotional abuse complaints have on the NPD leader’s perspective. Providing HR personnel with a deeper understanding of how personality disorders impact workplace performance can prove to be useful. While a plethora of information exists to support (in person and online support) for those dealing with individuals exhibiting personality disorders (e.g., Brown 2002), many of these resources may prove impractical in situations where the personality disorder has not yet been defined. Employee Assistance Programs personnel (who are prepared to assist employees with Axis I disorders such as depression and anxiety) may be trained and available to appropriately identify employees with personality disorders (Yudofsky 2005). These professionals can also help reduce workplace conflict by offering co-workers support and constructive strategies for dealing with conflict with colleagues. Ultimately, when HR personnel and business managers develop a better understanding of employee psychology, they are better equipped to understand the behaviors employees and their impact on the organization and co-workers. Given that personality disorders can cause as much distress to family members, friends and co-workers as to the NPD leader herself (Miller et al. 2007), increased access to mental health services may be most beneficial to all. Yet, because of the treatment-refractory nature of personality disorders, better access to mental health services may be unsuccessful in altering the NPD leader’s dysfunctional behaviors. Also, access to mental health coverage does not guarantee that employees will seek support or treatment. Detecting signs in victimized employees Human Resources professionals should pay close attention to employee complaints, especially if they coincide with an increased number of absences. Ultimately, all behavioral complaints made from or about employees call for thorough investigation, likely involving speaking to the parties identified in the complaints and following up at regular intervals to assess if the initial problem has dissipated.

Recruitment of NPD Corporate Leaders and Corrective Action The most effective way to avoid narcissistic leaders ascending to senior level executive positions is intercepting at the time of recruitment and promotion (Benson and Hogan 2008). In terms of selection and development, recruiters and HR professionals would benefit from moving

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

107

from the current heroic leadership model to a more relational one (Higgs 2003) as well as encouraging greater focus on self-awareness (Kets de Vries 1993b). Furthermore, better understanding is needed regarding the career progression of narcissistic personality-disordered leaders in order to provide important clues for spotting narcissistic tendencies early on and in order to develop more effective interventions (Higgs 2009). Higgs suggests that a more systematic approach to reducing the emergence and relative prevalence of NPD leaders involves going over the processes, nature, and conditions that are employed during the selection process for leaders and/ or potential leaders (Benson and Hogan 2008; Padilla and Mulvey 2008). Those in charge of successional planning efforts and in the identification of “high potential” employees should also be enforcing these efforts. In addition, it is recommended that HR professionals and managers be properly trained to identify the hallmarks of NPD behaviors and their effects on subordinates. This knowledge should in turn be used during the interview process, especially at the executive level since this is where extreme narcissism is most prominent. This knowledge could be shared in non-threatening ways via leadership training seminars for employees. Human Resources departments should consider including yearly workshops on work relationships for themselves and for employees at all levels of the organizations. These workshops should be facilitated by an external and professionally trained consultant who could address the full spectrum of work-relationship matters, from basic to complex, including conflict-resolution and enhancement of already positive work interactions. This training should be framed as a positive professional development opportunity rather than as a covert finger-pointing exercise. The workshops could eventually serve as a safe catalyst for employees to identify and possibly report incidents of abusive treatment by their managers or leaders. In turn, HR professionals should communicate that all complaints made by employees are thoroughly investigated and that disciplinary action may follow for the perpetrators of abuse regardless of their position within the organization.

Healthcare Coverage, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Legal Considerations Studies that investigate the effects that mental health has on the workplace often explore the potential for improved insurance coverage of psychiatric disorders provided by employers. These studies’ findings often

108  M.-L. GERMAIN

emphasize that better coverage is positively correlated with worker productivity and that it lowers employee turnover. However, seeing how personality disorders individuals are largely unwilling to seek help, providing better mental health services may prove fruitless in improving the behavior of NPD individuals. Aside from the fact that there are very few, if any, widely successful treatments for personality disorders (Gunderson and Gabbard 2000; Stone 2007; Gabbard 2000), individuals who suffer from personality disorders are often not interested in, let alone capable of, making necessary changes. In fact, many insurance companies claim that personality disorders are simply untreatable and they therefore offer little to no reimbursement for services (Gabbard 2005). Nonetheless, coverage should be made available to all employees. As seen earlier in this book, colleagues of a personality-disordered individual often experience as much, if not more, stress than the disordered individual themselves (Jackson and Burgess 2000; Miller et al. 2007). It is vital for employers to consider the legal deliberations surrounding mental health in the work environment. For instance, individuals are afforded ample protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (Goldman 2006a; EEOC 1997) from being terminated by employers based on their professional diagnosis of a Personality Disorder. Based on these protections granted by the ADA, it is difficult for employers to terminate employees who suffer from a personality disorder (especially when it is disclosed by the employee), no matter how disruptive it may prove to be for the workplace environment (Ettner et al. 2011). Having a clear understanding of the nature and consequences of personality disorders by managers and Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) is crucial for minimizing conflicts within the workplace, employee turnover, and other negative impacts on the organization and its employees. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (as well as other nondiscrimination laws), the majority of employers are required to provide “reasonable accommodations” to employees with disabilities, if they qualify. Although most employers are cognizant of the various accommodations made available to people with physical and communication disabilities, they are much less aware of the accommodations that exist for employees with non-visible disabilities, such as psychiatric disorders. If and when employees require such accommodations, organizations are obligated to comply. Examples of accommodations may include a flexible workplace (such as working remotely/from home); flexible scheduling

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

109

(working part-time, job sharing arrangements, changes made to the beginning or ending of working hours, time compensated, and/or the ability to make up missed time); leave options (sick leave based on mental health complications, utilizing vacation time in a flexible manner, extra administrative leave or leave without pay for treatment or recovery purposes, general leave of absence and/or the option to use occasional leave such as several hours at a time for reasons involving therapy or other health-related appointments); frequent breaks (break schedules based on the employee’s needs instead of adhering to a fixed schedule, more frequent breaks, and/or greater flexibility when scheduling breaks, establishment of coverage during breaks to support the employee, and the allowance of breaks to use the telephone during working hours in order to call professionals for support) (Department of Labor 2016). These accommodations must be extended to the NPD leader, should she ever choose to disclose her personality disorder. This disclosure also limits the employer’s ability to dismiss her from her job. Workplace Bullying and Harassment As of 2017, there is no legislation in place to protect employees from bullying. Supervisors who have bullied employees may be simply written up for failing to “adequately resolve professional conflicts.” In 2009 when the State of Connecticut attempted to pass workplace bullying legislation known as the Senate Bill 60. The bill was withdrawn by the Connecticut’s Labor Committee. In 2015, another bill, the Senate Bill 432, also known as the Healthy Workplace Bill, aimed to offer more protections to employees in the workplace and to prevent workplace bullying. Specifically, it aimed to: 1. provide greater protections to employees who are bullied in the workplace, 2. lessen the legal burdens necessary for employees who wish to bring an action against their employer for bullying, and 3. create a workplace bullying advisory board to explore and address instances of workplace bullying in the state (Healthy Workplace Bill 2016). The bill was not passed. Although there is no state or federal law protecting employees from being bullied, the federal law clearly states that any form of harassment

110  M.-L. GERMAIN

by employees to employees such as harassment based upon race, religion, color, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, sex, or sexual orientation, is strictly prohibited (Department of Labor 2016). Furthermore, most organizations prohibit anyone in the workplace, including contractors from engaging in any type of harassing conduct. Furthermore, most organizations have policies and procedures that encourage efficient recognition, reporting, and remediation of harassment. The next few paragraphs explain how to recognize inappropriate conduct and highlight the responsibilities of both the employee who has witnessed or has been subjected to workplace harassment and the employer. Harassment in the workplace that is deemed inappropriate may present itself in two ways: • “Quid pro quo” harassment, occurring in cases where employment decisions or treatment of employees are reliant on the submission to or refraction of unwanted conduct, generally of a sexual nature. • Antagonistic work environment. Highly offensive conduct aimed at a person or person(s) associated with one or more of the aforementioned protected groups; such conduct is deemed so severe or offensive that it promotes a hostile or malevolent work environment or results in a detrimental employment decisions (i.e., being fired or demoted). Quid pro quo harassment is typically based on an employee’s reception to or refusal of unwanted sexual advances or the seeking of sexual favors, often resulting in profound employment decisions. Quid pro quo can also be due to unwelcome conduct of a religious nature. Harassment such as this frequently occurs at the hands of an individual who has the power to decide(or recommend) formal employment outcomes such as termination, devaluation, or denial of a potential promotion, all posing detrimental outcomes for the victim. Research about the behaviors of NPD individuals supports that most NPD leaders may be more likely to engage in the second type of unlawful harassment: the creation an antagonistic work environment. An aggressive work environment is often based on the reproachable conduct displayed by supervisors, co-workers, clients, contractors, or any others that interact with the victim on the job, resulting in the unwanted conduct rendering an intimidating, hostile, or offensive workplace atmosphere.

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

111

Behaviors that may subsidize an undesirable and hostile working environment include: • Telling off-color jokes concerning race, gender, incapacity, or other protected bases • Commenting on physical traits • Using disparaging or inappropriate rapports or epithets • Using offensive gestures • Depicting and expressing crude language • Damaging the victim’s work • Engaging in aggressive physical conduct • Displaying sexually suggestive or racially insensitive pictures When Harassing Conduct Violates the Law The intention of most employers’ harassing conduct policy is to offer a procedure that addresses incidents involving unwanted conduct well before such conduct becomes pervasively severe enough to elicit an antagonistic work environment under the law. Typically, conduct of a harassing nature must be both unwelcome and based on the victim’s protected status. In addition, the behavior must be objectively severe and pervasive enough to denote a work environment that a reasonable person would likely seem hostile or abusive in addition to the behavior being subjectively abusive to the affected person. Whether an incident or ongoing issues of harassing conduct is deemed severe or pervasive occurs on a case-by-case basis, with consideration being given to the following factors: 1. The regularity of the unsolicited discriminatory conduct 2. The intensity of the behavior 3. Whether or not the conduct appeared to be physically threatening, humiliating, or a simply a minor offensive occurrence 4. Whether the conduct perversely interfered with performance on the job 5. The effect of the behavior on the employee’s psychological welfare 6.  If the harasser maintained a position of superiority within the organization Antagonistic work environment cases are often difficult to recognize. Specific aspects of each situation must be closely examined in

112  M.-L. GERMAIN

determining whether belligerent conduct has in fact gone from “ordinary tribulations of the workplace, such as the sporadic use of abusive language… and occasional teasing,” to unlawful harassment (Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 788 (1998)). What Should an Employee Do if He Witnesses or Is Subjected to Harassment? The most effective manner in which to limit conduct of a harassing nature in the workplace is to regard such behavior as misconduct, even if it has not elevated to the extreme levels of harassment that are actionable under the law. Eliminating harassment before it becomes overtly severe and pervasive should be the ultimate goal of any company policy. All incidents should be immediately reported to the employee’s Human Resources Department, as an employer cannot possibly correct harassing conduct if a supervisor, manager or HR personnel is not made aware of it. An organization’s harassing conduct policy is not intended to replace an employee’s Equal Employment Opportunity Rights (EEOC.gov), allowing employees to pursue claims of harassing conduct through both avenues simultaneously. What Should HR Do When a Complaint Is Filed? Thorough and proper investigations into harassment claims are critical to reducing the potential for litigation. However, many well-intentioned employers end up conducting investigations incorrectly and, in turn, increasing their own risk and possible liability. An investigation should be conducted as soon as a harassment complaint is made, with HR professionals dutifully prepared to handle any such situations. This process begins with developing an understanding of the overall investigative procedures in advance and being sufficiently prepared with professionally trained personnel (or the ability to quickly seek outside counsel for assistance). Investigators should know and follow the proper steps for conducting an impartial and thorough investigation, including a competent understanding of how to interview the complainant, the alleged harasser (in this case an NPD harasser), and the witnesses, if any exist. Once all of the facts have been gathered, it is crucial to follow best practices for communicating the results of the investigation and for

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

113

imposing necessary discipline. This is where employment law attorneys can play an important role in sorting out the rights and responsibilities of employers for conducting harassment investigations. The Narcissistic Plaintiffs: Human Resources Professionals… Beware! A common characteristic of NPD individuals is the need for vindication, a trait that can be detrimental in cases such as these. While many employers and/or insurance companies may offer significant compensation for such cases in an effort to efficiently settle unsupported claims, plaintiffs with NPD will often ignore such offers, seeking vindication and fully believing that a judge will pronounce their absolute correctness in everything that they have ascertained (Farnsworth and Ella 2015). The defendant-employer faces a difficult situation when dealing with a plaintiff-employee (such as an NPD leader) who inherently believes that they are right and everyone else is wrong. While widely recognized in the USA, at-will employment (the ability for employers to terminate employees at any given time, no cause required) holds many exceptions. For example, employees who have been terminated are often able to find credible legal theories to support complaints in the instance of pursuing their grievances in a court of law. Due to the fact that nearly everyone belongs to a protected class, such grievances may include discrimination and defamation. Whether a terminated NPD employee persuades an attorney to take her case on a contingency basis or chooses to pursue the case “pro se” (without an attorney), based on the arrogant nature of NPD, she will often fail to recognize that their case lacks merit while ignoring the exorbitant costs of litigation. Many past cases involving notable NPD leaders have had administrative charges dropped, lawsuits let go by trial court judges, and affirmation of such decisions by the court of appeals, leaving NPD leaders with empty bank accounts and utter loss of life savings. As seen in this chapter, behavioral change can take years to occur, if at all, and the likelihood that an NPD employee remains with an organization for that long is small. Providing therapy can potentially extend an NPD individual’s length of employment, but it also requires that the NPD agrees to be counseled, along with the hiring of an external consultant, taking precious time away from work for the employees (in addition to the willingness of all parties to participate), not to mention the significant financial investment on the part of the company.

114  M.-L. GERMAIN

This chapter also pointed out that, left undetected, employees’ extreme narcissistic behaviors can cause escalating toxicity that permeates organizations. Because psychotherapy falls outside of the expertise of most HR professionals and managers, it is best left to trained Employee Assistance Program specialists or third-party behavioral consultants or organizational psychologists. While HR professionals may not be able to provide psychotherapy services, they are empowered to ensure that employees work in a safe environment. They can increase the awareness of existing company-wide policies that protect employees against harassment, and make all employees aware of the external support available to them, such as Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs). Narcissism at Work—Personality Disorders of Corporate Leaders.

References American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders (4th ed.). American Psychiatric Association; Washington, DC. Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). Benson, M. J., & Hogan, R. (2008). How dark side leadership personality destroys trust and degrades organizational effectiveness. Organisations and People, 15(3), 10–18. Bergman, M. E., Langhout, R. D., Palmieri, P. A., Cortina, L. M., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2002). The (un) reasonableness of reporting: Antecedents and consequences of reporting sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 230. Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1996). Beyond distrust: “Getting even” and the need for revenge. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 246–260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452243610.n12. Brown, N. W. (2002). Working with the self-Absorbed: How to handle Narcissistic personalities on the job. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). (2012). How widespread is violence in the workplace? bls.gov http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshfaq1.htm. Accessed 2 Apr 2016. Camm, T. W. (2014). The dark side of leadership: Dealing with a Narcissistic boss. SME Annual Meeting. February 23–26, 2014, Salt Lake City, UT. Caulkin, S. (2007). On leadership. Observer, January, p. 28. Department of Labor. Maximizing productivity: Accommodations for employees with psychiatric disabilities. Retrieved from https://www.dol.gov/odep/ pubs/fact/psychiatric.htm. Department of Labor. Workplace Harassment. Retrieved from https://www.dol. gov/oasam/programs/crc/2011-workplace-harassment.htm.

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

115

The Department of Labor’s Policy & Procedures for Preventing & Eliminating Harassing Conduct in the Workplace (Harassing Conduct Policy). (2016). DLMS 4—Chapter 700. DuBrin, A. J. (2012). Narcissism in the workplace: Research, opinion, and practice. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Ettner, S. L., MaClean, J. C., & French, M. T. (2011). Does having a dysfunctional personality hurt your career? Axis II Personality Disorders and labor market outcomes. Industrial Relations, 50(1), 149–173. doi:10.1111/ j.14232X.2010.00629.x. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/articles/PMC3204880/. EEOC. (1997). Enforcement guidance on the Americans with disabilities act and psychiatric disabilities. The U.S. equal employment opportunity commission. (EEOC Notice Number 915.002, Date: 3–25-97). Retrieved from http:// www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/psych.html. Farnsworth, M., & Ella, V. J. (2015). The Legal Consequences of Hiring Narcissists. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/pages/0515-narcissistic-personality-disorder.aspx. Ferris, P. (2004). A preliminary typology of organisational response to allegations of workplace bullying: See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 32(3), 389–395. Gabbard, G. O. (2000). Psychotherapy of personality disorders. The Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 9(1), 1–6. Gabbard, G. O. (2005). Personality disorders come of age. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162(5), 833–835. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.162.5.833. Germain, M. L. (2014). Work-related suicide: An analysis of U.S. government reports and recommendations for Human Resource Development. Employee Relations, 36(2), 148–164. Goldman, A. (2005). Leadership pathology as a nexus of dysfunctional organizations. Paper presented at The Academy of Management Conference. Honolulu: Hawaii. Goldman, A. (2006a). High toxicity leadership: Borderline personality disorder and the dysfunctional organization. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(8), 733–746. Goldman, A. (2006b). Personality disorders in leaders: Implications of the DSM IV-TR in assessing dysfunctional organizations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(5), 392–414. Healthy Workplace Bill. (2016). Retrieved from http://healthyworkplacebill. org/states/ct/. Herman, J. (1997). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence from domestic abuse to political terror. New York: Basic Books.

116  M.-L. GERMAIN Higgs, M. (2003). How can we make sense of leadership in the 21st century? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(5), 273–284. doi:10.1108/01437730310485798. Higgs, M. (2009). The good, the bad and the ugly: Leadership and narcissism. Journal of change management, 9(2), 165–178. Jackson, H. J., & Burgess, P. M. (2000). Personality disorders in the community: A report from the Australian national survey of mental health and wellbeing. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 35(12), 531–538. Jenkins, M. F. (2011). Workplace Bullying: The Perceptions of the Target, the Alleged Perpetrator and the HR Professional. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Adelaide, Australia. Kets de Vries, M. F. (1993a). Leaders, fools and imposters: Essays on the psychology of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kets de Vries, M. F. (1993b). Life and death in the executive fast lane. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Konovsky, M. A. (2000). Understanding procedural justice and its impact on business organizations. Journal of Management, 26(3), 489–511. Lind, E. A., Greenberg, J., Scott, K. S., & Welchans, T. D. (2000). The winding road from employee to complainant: Situational and psychological determinants of wrongful-termination claims. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 557–590. Lovallo, D., & Kahneman, D. (2003). Delusions of success. Harvard Business Review, 81(7), 56–63. Maccoby, M. (2000). Narcissistic leaders: The incredible pros, the inevitable cons. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 68–78. Malkin, C. (2015). Rethinking Narcissism. The Bad -and Surprisingly Good-about feeling Special. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Miller, J. D., Campbell, W. K., & Pilkonis, P. A. (2007). Narcissistic personality disorder: Relations with distress and functional impairment. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 48(2), 170–177. Namie, G., & Namie, R. (2009). The Bully at work: What you can do to stop the hurt and reclaim your dignity on the job. Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks. Padilla, A., & Mulvey, P. (2008). Leadership toxicity: Sources and remedies. Organisations and People, 15(3), 27–37. Payson, E. D. (2002). The wizard of Oz and other Narcissists: Coping with the one-way relationship in work, love, and family. Royal Oak, MI: Julian Day Publications. Post, J. M. (1993). Current concepts of the narcissistic personality: Implications for political psychology. Political Psychology, 14(1), 99–121. Roth, S., Newman, E., Pelcovitz, D., van der Kolk, B., & Mandel, F. S. (1997). Complex PTSD in victims exposed to sexual and physical abuse: Results from

6  CONSIDERATIONS FOR HR, CONSULTANTS … 

117

the DSM-IV field trial for posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 10, 539–555. Salin, D. (2008). Organisational responses to workplace harassment: An exploratory study. Personnel Review, 38(1), 26–44. Stone, M. H. (2007). Personality-disordered patients: Treatable and untreatable. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. Winefield, H. R., Saebel, J., & Winefield, A. H. (2010). Employee perceptions of fairness as predictors of workers’ compensation claims for psychological injury: An Australian case-control study. Stress and Health, 26(1), 3–12. Wesner, B. S. (2007). Responding to the Workplace Narcissist. Unpublished Thesis. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University. Ylipaavalniemi, J., Kivimäki, M., Elovainio, M., Virtanen, M., KeltikangasJärvinen, L., & Vahtera, J. (2005). Psychosocial work characteristics and incidence of newly diagnosed depression: a prospective cohort study of three different models. Social Science and Medicine, 61(1), 111–122. Yudofsky, S. C. (2005). Fatal flaws: Navigating destructive relationships with people with disorders of personality and character. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing.

PART IV

Case Studies and Proposed Solutions

CHAPTER 7

Case Studies and Practical Advice

Abstract  Germain presents five case studies from well-known individuals including Steve Jobs, Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, and two fictitious characters. She follows up these cases by highlighting the common characteristics within the protagonist in each case study. The chapter concludes by suggesting approaches for victims of NPD leaders to utilize in order to protect their careers, optimize their professional relationships, and, if necessary, decide when to exit their job. Keywords  Steve Jobs · Donald Trump · Sarah Palin · Approaches for victims of NPD leaders · Career · Professional relationships While most people live an attached life—emotionally, spiritually, morally and communally, Donald Trump’s looks superficially successful and profoundly miserable. None of us would want to live in the howling wilderness of his own solitude, no matter how thick the gilding. (David Brooks, New York Times reporter)

Case studies and suggested approaches for professional relationships

Section 7.3 of the American Psychiatrists Association’s (APA) code of ethics, also known as the Goldwater Rule (named after presidential candidate Barry Goldwater), states that it is unethical for psychiatrists to © The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_7

121

122  M.-L. GERMAIN

give a professional opinion about public figures they have not examined in person and obtained consent from. It is also unethical to discuss their mental health in public statements (Kroll and Pouncey 2016). The intent of the case studies in this chapter is not to make diagnoses but to provide examples of how NPD traits may manifest themselves in individuals, and to emphasize the commonalities in these individuals’ personal background. When not fictitious, the profiles relate information that is published in publicly accessible sources. Dolores Jackson, Vice-President of Communications Personal Background Dolores Jackson was raised in an upper-middle-class family in the South and lived in a seemingly privileged and stable environment. She and her brother were expected to behave and to excel in everything they did. Her parents had little patience for the flaws they saw in their children; their personal validation rested heavily on their children’s success. After all, their accomplishments were a direct reflection on their parents’ own achievements—or lack thereof. They were overly preoccupied with how others perceived them and they expected their children to uphold the image outsiders had of them, one of the perfect parents with perfect children. Dolores always aimed at pleasing her parents. Although she appeared to be fulfilled, her parents’ behaviors toward her showed a great deal of detachment. For most of her childhood, she spent her weekends at her grandmother’s house. This allowed her parents to attend to their busy social lives. Professional Life In her professional life, Dolores was always an overachiever. After graduating from college(the same college her mother had graduated from), Dolores landed a job as a reporter for a local newspaper. Finding success by using her charm, intelligence, hard work and self-determination, she moved up the corporate ranks and by age 50, she had become the vice-president of a large corporation in the South. In her role as head of communications, Dolores liked handling corporate branding and crisis management. She often claimed to be in charge of the “world’s biggest organizational issues for the world’s largest company” and to meet with the “most powerful business people in the industry.”

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

123

One of her subordinates, Phyllis, was a young and promising PR specialist. He had novel ideas on how to promote several products the company sold, one of which he presented to Dolores. She quickly shut down her subordinate’s idea, claiming that he had a poor understanding of the company’s typical client profile. Instead, she suggested that Phyllis focuses on developing video content for the company’s website for which budget funds had been set aside. Excited about her suggestion, Phyllis developed a series of shorts. When he presented them to Dolores, she blurted out, “What are these? There is no money in the budget for that. By the way, I overheard you’re interested in taking over my job. Not only you’ll never get my job but you’ll never get another job.” Understandably, Phyllis was furious and emailed Dolores’s boss, the CEO. The next day, Dolores went to Phyllis’s office and aggressively reprimanded him for going over her head. She threatened that, if he did that again, she would fire him on the spot. From then on, Phyllis was regularly left out of various special projects and company business trips. In meetings, Dolores would ridicule his suggestions and on the rare occasion that they were on a business trip together, Dolores would hammer him with reports to turn in, giving him minimal time to prepare. Then, upon their return to the company headquarters, Dolores would consistently challenge Phyllis’s expense reports. Phyllis felt so stressed by the hostile interactions with Dolores that he contacted the director of Human Resources, Cathy. Cathy informed him that no other employees had ever filed a complaint about Dolores, to which Phyllis replied, “They all fear her. Talking to her is like walking on eggshells. I have emails and witnesses.” “I’ll see what I can do,” Cathy responded. Feeling unsupported by his employer’s HR department, Phyllis sought the advice of an attorney who suggested that he keep a log and document all the offensive encounters with Dolores. He also suggested that he save all of his incoming and outgoing emails. Eventually, Phyllis’s stress level was so high that he decided to resign and search for a new job. Much to Phyllis’s dismay, one prospective employer reported that he had received mediocre reviews from his last boss. Phyllis’s attorney sent his former employer the trail of threatening work emails Dolores had sent to Phyllis. The employer agreed that all future reviews sent to prospective employers would be positive. Phyllis found a job shortly thereafter.

124  M.-L. GERMAIN

Dolores had a decade-long distant friendship with René, with whom she had considered starting a business venture. In order for their partnership to get off the ground, the pair had to purchase a building with several offices. Because Dolores’s family was in the South, she insisted on staying in that geographic area. She had specific requirements for the building: It had to have parking, at least three independent offices, and be no further than one mile from the center of town. Such buildings were available but at a high cost. Early on in their friendship, Dolores had disclosed to René that she owned two buildings in a different state, which limited her ability to purchase a third one. She often praised René for being a smart and shrewd negotiator. She was also confident that their business would thrive. René also expressed his own financial limitations: He, too, owned two buildings in another state. He had made it clear to Dolores that he did not want to invest more than $450,000 in the purchase of an office building. Because he believed in Dolores’s promise to develop a very profitable business, he offered to serve as the loan carrier if Dolores agreed to pay half of all monthly building expenses, including the loan payments and the utilities. Dolores gave him her word. “I’ll pay at least 50% and even more if I happen to use more space than you in the building and after I sell one of my properties,” she told him. René had known her for 10 years and trusted her. Dolores often talked about her 2 million-dollar out-of-state buildings and about being well compensated by her employer. René was confident about her ability to pay. Mainly, he believed that his decade-long friendship with her made her worthy of his trust. He contacted a commercial real estate agent and started searching for a building that met Dolores’s criteria. He spent countless hours visiting buildings. Every time the realtor showed him a building that met the requirements, he would ask Dolores to visit it. Dolores never liked any of the buildings. They were either “ugly, too small, too far from town, or in bad neighborhoods.” A month into their search, Dolores called René to tell him he needed to increase his purchase price to $650,000 because it would increase their chance of finding the building they (she) wanted. Uncomfortable with the idea of being financially burdened, René refused. Dolores went into a rage and lashed out, “Well, I’m going to show you how to buy a building. I’m going to buy it. I’ll show you how it’s done.” René was shocked by Dolores’s patronizing. Her remark made him feel inadequate as her business partner and as her friend. Dolores never followed through with her threat. René continued

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

125

screening properties for five more months, weathering Dolores’s regular critiques. He was disappointed by her continued demands and her passive involvement in the search. Meanwhile, Dolores reminded him of her urgency to move into a building to get the business started. One building finally seemed to fit their needs. It was a large two-story structure with unique, luxurious features such as an ensuite boardroom and hightech integration. However, the building was 40 minutes from town. “It’s far but fine. It will do. At least I’ll be able to meet my deadline to get my office furniture moved out of storage,” Dolores said. René handled all of the mortgage paperwork and closed on the building within weeks. The day after the closing, Dolores moved her office furniture throughout the entire building, claiming that hers was better quality and more attractive that René’s. Although his furniture was modern, high-end, and more suited for an office environment, she insisted that it could only be placed in his office. When the first utility bill arrived, René asked Dolores how she wanted to proceed with the payment of her half of the office expenses. Dolores answered, “I can’t pay now. It’s going to be hard to pay for anything until I sell one of my two out-of-state buildings.” In addition to the monthly utility bills, the building required some repairs and updates. Also, Dolores incessantly complained about the carpeted office entrance. In her own words, it “looked like a dump” and, according to her, it needed wood floors. René contacted a contractor, had wood floors installed, and paid the $5000 renovation bills. Dolores continued to claim that her personal expenses prevented her from sharing any expenses. She also insisted on having other improvements made to the building. For instance, she wanted a large saltwater fish tank. She had read that saltwater fish tanks make for peaceful work environments. A 200-gallon tank arrived a few weeks later. It had to be maintained by a professional company, which charged $250 monthly. A year later, Dolores was still refusing to pay her share of all building expenses. She would, however, talk about taking her family on trips to the beach and out-of-state. René, who was still paying all the bills, was increasingly feeling taken advantage of. He told Dolores that the ­situation was unfair and that the building had to be put on the market for sale. She continued to claim she was unable to pay and blamed the slow real estate market for not being able to sell one of her out-ofstate buildings. René later found out that neither of her two buildings were listed for sale. Rather, she had renters in one and only paid half

126  M.-L. GERMAIN

of the second building’s expenses, letting her former business partner pay the other half. After several weeks, tension between René and Dolores became intolerable. René, who by then was convinced he had been fooled by Dolores, insisted they put the building on the market. She reluctantly agreed, gambling on the fact that it would take a very long time to sell. He called the realtor and listed the building. Dolores’s large office was always incredibly disorganized. Her office floor was littered with papers. She made little to no efforts to tidy up before potential buyers’ visits. The entire time Dolores worked in the office building, she invited business partners to use the extra office at no cost in exchange for services that directly benefited her. A month later, she told René that she was considering moving out and ending the business but that she could not make a final decision until she returned from her next vacation. She also informed René that, should she decide to move, she would need to leave most of her furniture in the building until she could find a way to move it. René stood his ground and told her that all of her furniture and belongings would need to be removed at the same time she moved out. Upon her return from vacation, Dolores confirmed her intention to leave. Although sad at the thought of terminating their work partnership and angry at the thought of being left alone to deal with the sale of the building, René felt a sense of relief. He thought that at a minimum, he would be able to get rid of the expensive fish tank, his utility and maintenance bills would be lower, and the building would show better because it would be clutter-free. His stress from the longstanding tension with Dolores would also dissipate. The day before her move out of the building, Dolores violently came into René’s office and, pointing her finger at him, said, “If you do or say anything to damage my reputation, I will break your neck into pieces.” The next day, her movers picked up what she claimed was her most valuable belongings, leaving half of her furniture and several dozens of boxes of papers and photographs throughout the building. According to her movers, these were not on their list of items to remove from the building. René contacted Dolores to remind her that he wanted all of her items removed, all at once. She claimed she could not do that. A few weeks after Dolores moved out, René received an offer for the building. René contacted Dolores and urged her, once again, to remove her remaining property so that he could close by the contract for sale’s deadline.

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

127

For 2 months, Dolores made excuses. She didn’t have a way to move and store her remaining property; she had personal emergencies; her friend’s mother was ill; she had a new, demanding work schedule; and she had to care for her teenage son. Three weeks prior to the closing day, René became anxious about Dolores’s abandoned property. The building still contained the large amount of office furniture and boxes Dolores had left behind. His realtor urged him to contact an attorney and seek legal ways to have Dolores’s belongings removed. René consulted with an attorney who charged him $350 and gave him some clear, legal steps to follow. The first step was to send Dolores a letter with an official deadline to move her belongings. Unfortunately, Dolores continued to make excuses. She once came to the building unannounced, and took a few chairs and a small side table. As she was leaving the building, she disparaged René in front of a client, asking him if he had taken his medication for schizophrenia. René was shocked that Dolores would not only accuse him of having a mental disorder but also make this accusation in front of a client. The second step was to hire a “white glove” moving company at René’s expense and to move her belongings to a climate-control storage facility, also at René’s expense. The attorney had warned that Dolores could claim that her furniture had been damaged by the movers or by being in a storage facility if was not air-conditioned. The attorney also suggested him to document the move by taking pictures of the moving process and of the furniture being carefully wrapped up. René paid $2000 for the “white glove” move. The air-conditioned storage was $155 per month. René was able to close on the property just a week after moving Dolores’s belongings to storage. A few months later, René’s attorney received a letter from an attorney Dolores had hired. The letter claimed that René had stolen her furniture and ordered to arrange for a return. For an additional $350, René’s attorney wrote back describing the implicit agreement Dolores and René had entered into prior to René’s purchase of the building, along with an itemized list of all the expenses he had paid for almost 2 years, which amounted to $63,000. His attorney’s letter also requested that half of that amount be paid back to René in exchange for the return of Dolores’s furniture then stored in a climate-controlled facility. Finally, the attorney’s letter stated that René would consider mediation before filing a lawsuit against Dolores. René never heard from Dolores again. He cherished his regained peace of mind, his harassment-free life, and

128  M.-L. GERMAIN

the release from the financial burden. He opted against filing a lawsuit to recoup half of his financial loss. The idea of having to defend himself after being the victim of Dolores’s extreme narcissistic behavior was daunting. A lawsuit would require him to revisit some of the traumatic moments Dolores had put him through for almost 2 years. This reason alone discouraged him from initiating a lawsuit against Dolores. Notable Quotes In Dolores’s own words: I’m not interested in you or in your family history. After our business relationship is over, she won’t want to stay in contact with me (speaking about a former business partner). I’m not really that smart. If you do anything to damage my reputation, I will break your neck into pieces. You hear me? All you are is a petty paper pusher who sits on his ass all day.

Donald Trump, Businessman Personal Background Donald J. Trump was born in New York the fourth of five children. From an early age, Trump was very competitive and defied authority. Paul Almish, a childhood friend of Donald Trump, described him as “an aggressive teenager who did not like to lose.” In his memoir, The Art of the Deal, Trump wrote that his main goal as a young child was to create mischief. When Donald was 13, his parents sent him to boarding school located 70 miles from his home, with the hope that discipline would channel his energy. As one of his biographers noted, Donald was essentially banned from the family home and sent away—a rough way to start out in life. When he graduated in 1964, he was a student leader and a successful athlete. He was already a fierce competitor known to erupt in anger. In school, he misbehaved so often that his initials became his classmates’ nickname for detention (going to “DT”).

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

129

Trump’s mother, a Scottish immigrant, loved attention and often thrusted herself to the center of social gatherings. Donald Trump Jr. described Donald’s mother as, “the perfect combination of love but toughness.” She loved people looking at her, listening to her and paying attention to her. She liked being noticed.” Trump’s father, Fred Trump, was a stern, tightfisted and formal man who wore a jacket and tie at home. Donald Trump Jr. (Donald Trump’s son) once said about his granddad: “He was a worker who believed that to retire is to expire. He was a workaholic for whom life is a competition to the death where there is only winning and losing (Burgo 2015; CNN 2016). To this description, Donald added, “He was a “tough guy” who “knew how to get things done.” Fred was a famous New York real estate developer known to have greatly influenced Donald’s decision to pursue a career in real estate. But Donald’s personal goals were much grander than those of his father. His goal was to make Manhattan great, an idea his father had judged as foolish. Throughout his childhood, Trump wanted to be noticed, recognized and complimented. Becoming a Manhattan real estate mogul would feed those needs. Professional Life Trump is the epitome of what Maccoby (2004) calls the superstar CEO—the larger-than-life and self-promoting leaders featured on the covers of magazines like The Economist, Fortune, Time, and Business Week. From the onset of his career, Trump was unashamedly grandiose. He had a tendency to exaggerate, bending the truth to create the impression or deliver the information he preferred. Even then, he used to describe his accomplishments in superlative terms: He had built the tallest building in the world, the largest development in New York, and the most luxurious apartments in the City. No matter what he was doing, he was competing. When facing defeat, he would claim that he had won. If anyone challenged him or questioned his accomplishments, he would attack them. In the early 1990s, when facing bankruptcy, he blamed and shamed his advisors and employees (Burgo 2015). He fired many of his employees, refused to pay them, and offered no empathy or compassion. For Trump, denying responsibility was and still is a way of life. Those who worked with Trump clearly remember his demeaning and self-righteous style (Burgo 2015). He was quick to lose his temper, go into a rage, insult and humiliate employees in front of others, and accuse

130  M.-L. GERMAIN

them of being incompetent. A former business partner who worked with Trump on a construction project, Barbara Weltz, noted, “Working with him wasn’t easy. I was afraid to challenge him because he was loud. He would criticize employees in front of other people. He didn’t like to be challenged, ever.” Alan Seltzer, a New York City real estate attorney, added, “He is a bully. He takes advantage of people who did a good job for him and he doesn’t care.” When feeling attacked by the media, Trump claims to be treated unfairly. We’ve also heard him say he was treated unfairly by US District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel in the charge of Trump University fraud case. Whatever or whoever threatens his image of success and perfection appears to unsettle him. A 2016 article published in The New York Times reveals that Trump’s worst nightmare is public embarrassment and for his stardom to dim. When he feels he has been bested in public, his response can be volcanic (Barbaro 2016). He is anxious about losing his status and defeat is unimaginable. Despite his repeated corporate bankruptcies, he claims he never had a failure (D’Antonio 2016). Donald Trump thinks in dichotomous terms: Someone is either good or bad. “Like most demagogues, he needs an enemy. If he had to survive on his own merits and accomplishments, he’d flop” (Rubin 2017). Hillary Clinton fell in the “bad” category. She was “bad, the worst ever.” Trump claimed she was “crooked.” He obsessed about her during the 2016 US presidential election, incessantly mentioning her in Tweets, public speeches, and interviews. Even months after his presidential win, he continued his disparaging Tweets. It appears he may still hold grudges against her, possibly because her win of the popular vote is intolerable to him. After Clinton, he picked another villain: the press. Three months after being elected president, he returned to the campaign trail and attacked his new enemy, the media, the “enemy of the American people.” Making the media the new bad guy would discredit the press, especially when it focuses on his questionable decisions as president. In an October 2016 article published in The New York Times, columnist David Brooks draws a grim picture of Donald Trump’s life. He suggests that Trump’s inability to relate to people underlines his essential loneliness. He is essentially adviser-less, friendless. His party treats him as a stench it can’t yet remove. As Brooks puts it, “Imagine if you had to go through a single day without sharing kind little moments with strangers

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

131

and friends. Imagine if you had to endure a single week in a hate-filled world, crowded with enemies of your own making, the object of disgust and derision.” Notable Quotes • Donald J. Trump: “I’ll be the best president, most presidential president.” • Marvin Roffman, former financial analyst: “Trump is a brutal guy.” • Alan Lapidus, Architect, Trump Plaza Hotel & Casino: “Donald doesn’t do well in partnerships. Playing well with others isn’t his strong suit.” • Tony Swatz, co-author of The Art of the Deal: “Trump has short attention span, easily grows impatient.” • Alan Pomerantz, attorney: “We made the decision that Trump was worth more alive [financially] than in bankruptcy because he could best sell his own properties.” • John O’Donnell, former senior executive at Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino: “With Trump, it’s constant lies.” (O’Donnell and Rutherford 1991). Yes, it was a “tell-all” book. But it was written to set the record straight on lies Trump told about three of my friends and fellow executives who tragically died in a helicopter accident. You see, Donald Trump tried to blame these men, after their deaths, for his lack of experience, basic business acumen and greed. I owed it to my friends to not let him get away with it.” (Kruze 2016). • Cindy Adams, New York Post columnist: “He can do without blood but he can’t do without publicity.” • Donald is “An earthquake in a box” (Huffington Post 2016). • Donald J. Trump: “I loved to fight. I always loved to fight (…), all types of fights. Any kind of fight, I loved it, including physical …” (Messman, 2016). • Donald J. Trump: “I don’t have heroes” (Messman, 2016). • Donald J. Trump: “I don’t like to analyze myself because I might not like what I see” (Messman, 2016). • Donald J. Trump: “You can’t respect people because most people aren’t worthy of respect” (Messman, 2016). • Michael D’Antonio, a Trump biographer: “He learned from a young age that you’re not supposed to be vulnerable, trusting or soft. Always be driven, competitive, the winner. Otherwise you die.”

132  M.-L. GERMAIN

• David Brooks, The New York Times columnist: “Trump continues to display the symptoms of narcissistic alexithymia, the inability to understand or describe the emotions in the self. Unable to know themselves, sufferers are unable to understand, relate or attach to others.” • David Brooks, The New York Times columnist: “Imagine you are Trump. You are trying to bluff your way through a debate. You’re running for an office you’re completely unqualified for. You are chasing some glimmer of validation that recedes ever further from view. Your only rest comes when you are insulting somebody, when you are threatening to throw your opponent in jail, when you are looming over her menacingly like a mafioso thug on the precipice of a hit, when you are bellowing that she has “tremendous hate in her heart” when it is clear to everyone you are only projecting what is in your own. Trump’s emotional makeup means he can hit only a few notes: fury and aggression.” Sarah Palin, Governor Personal Background Sarah Palin was born in Idaho. She and her parents moved to Alaska when she was 3 months old. Her father was an overbearing, dictatorial, and competitive man who had unusually high expectations of others (Burgo 2015). For him, losing was not an option. Palin’s mother, a school secretary, provided little maternal comfort and nurturing. She was distant from her children and rarely attended to their needs, favoring her church activities instead. In contrast to this description of her parents, in her book Going Rogue, Palin paints her childhood as rather idyllic. An avid basketball player in high school in the early 1980s, Palin played for the Wasilla State championship girls’ basketball team. She appropriately earned the nickname “Sarah Barracuda,” for the manner in which she played on the court. After graduating from the University of Idaho in 1987, Palin worked as a television sports reporter for 2 years prior to becoming the co-owner of a commercial fishing operation. Palin boasts numerous other accomplishments and successes such as owning an outdoor recreational equipment company, being crowned Miss Wasilla in 1984, and competing in the Miss Alaska pageant.

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

133

Palin also prides herself on being the mother of five children. People close to her and her husband Todd often report that their marriage is filled with conflict and constant threats of divorce and that Todd handles the majority of parenting. Friends of the family have reported that the Palin children had to raise each other as they received very little parenting from Sarah, despite her self-description as a “hockey mom.” Several long-time friends have described Sarah Palin as standoffish, vicious, vengeful, vindictive, and even a bully. She seems to be a mother similar to her own: detached, self-absorbed, and lacking in empathy. Professional Life Elected to the Wasilla City Council in 1992, Palin’s agenda included running against tax increases in her Anchorage suburb. She exulted charm and a drive for success. Her election as mayor of the city 4 years later was no surprise. In 2013, she was named chairwoman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. Despite her status as an outcast in the Republican Party, 3 years after earning her chairwoman title, Palin was elected governor. She led a campaign with an overtly defiant theme, “Take a Stand.” Winning a three-way primary race against her incumbent Governor Frank Murkowski and former state Senator John Binkley, Palin seemed unstoppable. She went on to defeat former Democratic Governor Tony Knowles. Being the governor of a state that was well known for scandalous political mishaps, Palin claimed that her goal was to re-instill public confidence into the government. To showcase her commitment to this endeavor, she refused to invite lobbyists into her office, instigated an ethics reform legislation, and demolished the now infamous “bridge to nowhere” pork-barrel spending project. She also made quite a public display of selling the former governor’s personal jet on eBay (NPR 2008). Notwithstanding her rapid professional ascension, people who worked with Sarah Palin do not describe her or her work ethics in flattering terms. For instance, Leslie Ridle described Palin as a pathological liar (Burgo 2015). In a 2004 Anchorage Daily News article, Palin stated: “All I really needed to know I learned on the basketball court,” alluding to the idea that she sees competition and winning as the common ground between sports and politics. She reportedly tries to terminate employees that don’t support her ideas, including Chief of Police Standball for disagreeing with her views on operating hours for bars and rights for gun owners.

134  M.-L. GERMAIN

While she claims to be an inherently religious individual, she often appears to possess a deeply vengeful nature. Initially drawn to her personal magnetism, people are often shocked when Palin shares bitter occurrences of her destroying people for real or imagined slights against her. Sarah Palin has been described as mean, suspicious, thin-skinned, divisive, indolent, and obsessively preoccupied with settling personal scores rather than with the tending to her job, especially when she held the titles of mayor and governor. Palin also appears to possess a challenging relationship with ethics. For instance, she tried to appoint two of her friends on the city council and as mayor and used city budget to purchase her car. As governor, she frequently relied on her power to take down anyone who opposed her. When caught lying in the Troopergate case, she displayed questionable ethical standards. She also attempted to get her sister’s husband fired after he divorced her sister. Critics often say that Palin is politically naive and more show than substance. They also say that she is known for being a real looker from almost any camera angle. Her charming, gracious, and flirty nature at frequent book-signings and public appearances may be intoxicating, but trying to schedule her for an actual interview is a near impossibility, reporters have said. According to The Atlantic’s journalist Joshua Green, Palin has long obsessed over her image, even more so than most politicians (Green, 2011). According to one of her former aides, Frank Bailey, she orchestrated a campaign to inundate newspapers with phony letters offering her undue praise. She is an expert when it comes to working a room of like-minded evangelicals, granting her a plethora of dedicated Tea Party fans. She speaks for her fans and allows each and every one of them to feel as if they’re the only person on Earth. Despite her likeability during public appearances and her popularity with loyal Tea Party fans, according to an assembly of former employees, colleagues and rivals, Palin is decidedly a difficult person to get on with. Many of these (often contradictory) personality traits are explored in filmmaker Nick Broomfield’s 2011 documentary film about Palin. While traipsing through Palin’s ice-covered Alaskan hometown, the British director managed to charm his way into Palin’s modest childhood home. During his time there, Broomfield was able to pick the brain of Palin’s amiable father, Chuck Heath. Chuck proved to be an unfaltering supporter of his daughter, clearly acknowledging that Palin never lacked

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

135

a competitive drive, even as a child (NPR 2011). After being immersed in Palin’s life, Broomfield found himself worried about his perception of Palin’s ignorance. His witnessing of her inability to tolerate opposition, her reluctance to participate in public debate, and her innate ability to rile up a like-minded crowd, led him to believe that there is much more to this woman than meets the eye; and likely, many reasons to fear her gaining a position of power. Notable Quotes • Laura Chase, Palin’s campaign manager for mayor: “I wonder if she suffers from narcissistic personality disorder.” • In an interview on NPR, her biographer, Kaylene Johnson stated, “Well, she’s seriously competitive and she’s also a very hard worker. He father was actually a coach for track and cross-country, the teams she was on. And what he said was what she lacked in raw talent, she more than made up for in hard work” (NPR 2008). Steve Jobs, CEO Personal Background While several of his autobiographies mention his abandonment at birth, Steve Jobs believed that the experience of being abandoned had no effect on him. He spent his childhood in the Silicon Valley, California where he was reportedly bullied at school, something he did not tell his parents about until about age 11. Steve was known to defy authority. His parents reportedly rarely punished him for his transgressions. Steve seems to have had a distant relationship with his parents. When interviewed about his parents dropping him off at college for the first time, he confided, “It’s one of the things in life I really feel ashamed about. I was not very sensitive, and I hurt their feelings. I shouldn’t have. They had done so much to make sure I could go there, but I just didn’t want them around. I didn’t want anyone to know I had parents. I wanted to be like an orphan who had bummed around the country on trains and just arrived out of nowhere, with no roots, no connections, no background.” Professional Life Just like he defied authority growing up, Jobs did not follow the rules that typically govern social relationships. He was perpetually late for

136  M.-L. GERMAIN

meetings, would show up unannounced at people’s homes (Burgo 2015), or call employees in the middle of the night to discuss his ideas. His lack of empathy was flagrant. He was often cruel and harmful to people. Steve Jobs always thought he was more knowledgeable than anyone else and believed that he had a superior intellect. He adhered to a very categorical way of classifying things: people were either great or total idiots. If he thought someone was in the idiot category, he would treat them with contempt, mock them, call them names, or humiliate them in front of colleagues. He was always number one, the winner, and he made people around him feel like losers. Steve Jobs was known for imposing his vision onto others. His colleagues nicknamed him the “Reality Distortion Field.” Jobs had a problematic relationship with the truth. He was a master at bending facts to fit the purpose at hand. Often finding it difficult when his employees had creative ideas, he frequently took credit for them. He would sometimes dismiss an employee’s idea then, a few days later, propose that same idea as if it were his own. Joanna Hoffman who ran Apple’s Marketing team and won two “Standing Up To Steve” awards, once said: “He had the uncanny capacity to know exactly what your weak point is, know what will make you feel small, to make you cringe.” She added, “It’s a common trait in people who are charismatic and know how to manipulate people. Knowing that he can crush you makes you feel weakened and eager for his approval, so then he can elevate you and put you on a pedestal and own you” (Isaacson 2011). Jobs had an intense need to control his employees. He would either seduce or bully an employee into submission in order to make them do what he wanted. Despite his flaws, Steve Jobs has remained a hero to the general public. His devoted followers forgive him for his grandiosity and lack of empathy mainly because he was able to give them something of exceptional value (Burgo 2015). Perhaps his loyal followers would feel differently in knowing that Jobs would often ridicule new product ideas from others, then turn around and claim ownership of them, ignoring the contribution of the employees who had created the products (Pinto and Patanakul 2015). Notable Quotes • Steve Jobs to Isaacson, his biographer (2011): “You guys don’t know what you’re doing. I’m going to get someone else to do the ads because this is fucked up.”

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

137

• Jobs talking about Bob Belleville, hardware designer, at Xerox: “Everything you’ve ever done in your life is shit. So why don’t you come work for me?” • Jobs about Joe Nocera, columnist at The New York Times: “You think I’m an arrogant asshole who thinks he’s above the law, and I think you’re a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong.” • Jobs to James Vincent, in charge of the iPad ad campaign: “Your commercials suck…The iPad is revolutionizing the world, and we need something big. You’ve given me small shit.” • Jobs to Ryan Tate from the company Gawker: “By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others’ work and belittle their motivations?” William Strickland, Professor of History Personal Background William Strickland was born and raised in a middle-class neighborhood in Louisiana. Very little is known about his childhood. He rarely talked about his upbringing or his family. However, he would often brag about his brother’s success as an attorney. He would also share that he had to be self-sufficient early in life. He was raised with the mentality that one must take charge of their own path and never depend on others for support. Although he succeeded in his studies and became an accomplished musician, he maintained a conflicted opinion regarding his family background. Often feeling shame or resentment for the behavior of his parents, he wished for nothing from them. On the other hand, he struggled with a desire for them to accept and value him though always reached the conclusion that this desire would never be met. Strickland had very little family or familial connections throughout his life. By the time he was 40, he had been married and divorced three times. He did not communicate regularly with his brother. He felt estranged from his family. He admitted to his inability to tolerate the complaints or stressors from people in his life, in particular his wife or parents. Strickland was known to be easily irritated, frustrated, or filled with rage. He did not seem to care much about anyone. He once told a colleague, “Whatever I do, nothing is good enough, so I don’t give a shit, I don’t care if something happens … They don’t listen, and I can’t do anything.”

138  M.-L. GERMAIN

After graduating college with a degree in American history, he became a school teacher. Professional Life Mr. Strickland prided himself on being a successful high school history teacher, though he aspired to teach at the college level. After several unsuccessful job searches, he landed a full-time lecturer position at a large university in the Southeast region. For the first 2 years at the university, Mr. Strickland was well liked by his colleagues. Although his lecturer position was fixed-term and not tenured-track, Strickland had successfully worked his way through his departmental leadership to upgrade his title to assistant professor, which gave him a pay increase and make his job permanent. He was charming and took on many work responsibilities, which earned him the title of “rising star” in the department. Also, his praise of students assured him stellar faculty evaluations. In essence, he was adored by all. Clara Smith, a professor of History and colleague of Strickland, came to befriend him. They worked on several research projects together. One summer, Clara organized a study abroad trip with her students. She invited Strickland to co-teach a course on twentieth century American history. He accepted the offer. A few weeks later, Clara, Strickland, and their students headed to Paris, France. As the trip progressed, Strickland’s drinking and smoking in the company of students made Clara extremely uncomfortable, even though students were over the French legal age to consume alcohol and smoke. Upon their return to their home university, Clara shared her concerns about Strickland with her department chair. Her words were received with indifference. Clara slowly noticed that William was quite skilled with smear campaigning. He would visit each professor in their office, acted like their best friend, and spread rumors about Clara and other colleagues. Behind closed doors, he would disparage the very people he was friendly with hours before. Clara was astonished that the colleagues she had known for years could believe the rumors that newbie William Strickland was spreading over her truthful statements. She felt betrayed by the very people that she had befriended and trusted for years. Lacking an understanding of how such smart people could be so blind to Strickland’s calculating ways, she came to feel like the “black sheep” of the department. Clara felt increasingly isolated and alone with her distress. She would come to campus only to teach her courses and would leave campus

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

139

immediately after teaching in order to avoid running into William. Although Clara’s co-workers seemed oblivious to Strickland’s heinous behaviors, Clara’s students often came to her to complain about his inappropriate behaviors. He would reportedly get drunk with them at bars, smoke marijuana in their presence, verbally shred a handful of students in front of the class, and Skype-video call them without notice as late as eleven in the evening. Six years after being an assistant professor, time came for his colleagues and university administration to vote on Mr. Strickland’s tenure. The possibility that he may receive permanent employment in her department intensified Clara’s distress. Her pleads to her department chair and dean that Strickland’s behavior toward students was irresponsible were ignored. As a last-ditch effort, Clara reached out to the Provost, whom she knew well, with the hope that he would be more receptive to her concerns. Her attempts failed. It was too late to stop the Strickland tenure train. Many colleagues were unaware that Strickland’s past was filled with interpersonal problems. They were seemingly blind to his attitude of superiority, intolerance to rules or authority figures, moodiness, and perpetual resentment toward those who advanced past him. As he moved into his tenured position as associate professor, his intolerance for what he called “students’ inadequacies” became more and more apparent. It was not until students started to come forward with their stories about Strickland’s unprofessional behavior that the department chair and the dean realized that Clara may have been right. On one occasion, after losing his temper during class, several students complained to the administration. The department chair warned Strickland that such behaviors, if recurring, would not be tolerated. Strickland filed a formal grievance with the university, claiming to be “psychologically disabled” and that he worked in a hostile environment. He also reported that his dean and his department chair were “out to find faults” in him. After being told that students had complained about his behavior, he rebutted, “I don’t know what they’re talking about. I do what I am supposed to do, I have moved my department from a crisis situation into a prosperous, well-functioning unit at the university, but they always seem to point out things I am missing, and that makes me really angry.” In an effort to defend himself and boost his character, Strickland shared how his peers constantly confide in him, even with their personal problems. Strickland also boasted that he was good at resolving conflict

140  M.-L. GERMAIN

between other faculty members. His grievance was dismissed for lack of evidence. Several weeks later, while at a bar smoking illegal substances, one of Strickland’s students took a picture of him and posted it on social media platforms. The picture quickly made its way to the university’s History department and onto the university leadership team. When confronted, Mr. Strickland threatened to file a lawsuit against the university for defamation and emotional distress. On its end, the university hired a private investigator who effortlessly provided evidence of Mr. Strickland’s lawbreaking behaviors with students. When confronted with this evidence, Strickland turned in his resignation claiming that his wife had an exceptional job offer in the state of California. Reflecting on her experience as Strickland’s colleague, Clara Smith shared that she often felt manipulated, duped, frustrated, and shocked by his unscrupulous treatment of her and others. In her words, her experience working with him was “Seven years of hell.” Notable Quotes

I couldn’t care less about my colleagues’ lives. I manipulate them and they’re too stupid to even realize it. The hell with her. She’s a loser. She’s a troll. She’ll never amount to anything. His degree is shit. He graduated from a shitty university and his publications are shit. I graduated from the best History program in the country.

Overview of the cases This section highlights the characteristics of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) and some traits found in the protagonists’ description in the case studies. As detailed in Chap. 2, the DSM-5 criteria for NPD include the following descriptors: 1. A grandiose sense of self-importance 2. A preoccupation with fantasies involving unlimited power, success, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

141

3. A belief that oneself is uniquely “special” and should only associate with (and is only understood by) other “special” people or institutions 4. A need for excessive admiration 5. A sense of entitlement 6. Exploiting of relationships 7. A lack of empathy for others 8. Envious of others and/or a belief that others are envious of oneself 9. A display of arrogant and haughty behaviors or attitudes. The DSM-5 also suggests that narcissistic personality-disordered individuals present at least five of the above nine characteristics. To various degrees, all five individuals presented in the case studies share several of these characteristics. They all encountered challenges in their early development as children; they focus on grandiosity; experience difficulty connecting to others; are deficient in their display of empathy;and adhere to a winner-loser dynamic. Early developmental experiences of idealization, independence, high expectations, and powerlessness The similarities in their early life experiences are not a coincidence. With the exception of William Strickland who hardly ever shared information about his upbringing, they all had parents who were demanding, unsupportive, and/or emotionally detached. Steve Jobs, who was adopted as an infant, denied the effect that this separation from his birth mother may have had on him. Yet, research supports that adoption is almost always dramatic for the adoptee, especially at birth. It disrupts the attachment developed by the mother during pregnancy (Burgo 2015). This separation generally lies at the core of the shame that narcissistic personality-disordered individuals feel. In all five case studies, the influence of early developmental experiences tends to perpetuate coexisting internalized idealism, individuality, and self-enhancement. This acts in stark contrast to feelings of insufficiency, ineffectiveness, and self-devaluation. Grandiosity Most NPD leaders are hungry for endless validation and attention from outsiders. Lacking internal measures of their own worth, they rely on external but insecure criteria like beauty, wealth, fame, and the submission of other people. They are grandiose and act accordingly. William

142  M.-L. GERMAIN

attended the best History program in the country; Dolores met with the most powerful businessmen in the world, and Donald built the greatest buildings in the world. Empathy It is unclear whether NPD individuals are “lacking empathy” or are “unwilling” to employ empathic processing. When they feel as if they are in control, they can often simulate appropriate displays of empathy. In general, this will only occur when the NPD individuals’ self-esteem is heightened and it is in their best self-interest to make a show of empathy (Ronningstam 2009). Dolores very occasionally claimed to care about her business partner René’s burden with the office expenses. Yet, she made no effort to pay even one bill over the 21 months she occupied the office. The fake display of empathy was manipulative in nature and aiming to make René feel virtuous about his continued payments. Conversely, when situations arise that may threaten to expose a lack of emotional tolerance, it often results in the NPD individuals disengaging empathetically. Their lack of empathy partially explains why they are unable to sustain long-term friendships in or outside of work. They seem to be denied all the positives that go with friendship and cooperation. People could be sources of care for them, but in their disordered state, they can only hate and demean them. Their attempts at closeness are parodies. NPDs tend to avoid intense feelings, which they experience as overwhelming. For instance, emotions such as envy, anger, or intense shame are generally intolerable, especially when in combination with self-criticism and self-hatred. Also intolerable is the sense that the NPDs are not measuring up or might be losing control of situations of an interpersonal nature. In these cases, their empathy may be expressed in a shame-driven abandonment and evasion of emotionally heavy interactions, as seen in the situation of William Strickland and his superiors at the university. It is therefore easier to avoid emotions than it is to be overpowered by them. Because they are aware of basic social norms, NPD individuals can pretend to be engaged, especially when doing so can serve them. Although they may not genuinely relate to someone else’s experience, they can put on a good show. Alternatively, they have a keen ability to switch and show signs of empathic disengagement such as overt rejection, constant blame of others, and belligerent criticism. This disconnect between empathic openness and separation is clearly seen when William

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

143

Strickland talks about his inclination for helping his peers, but at the same time clearly expresses his dislike for the department chair and fury toward Clara Smith. For NPD individuals who are in leadership positions with the power to make impactful decisions, as in the cases of Steve Jobs and Dolores Jackson, a deficit in empathic capabilities can be temporarily positive (Bradley and Westen 2008; Maccoby 2003; Russ et al. 2008). Under certain circumstances, empathic detachment and thoughtlessness can improve attainments and prolific functioning by allowing risk taking to occur and by staying focused on a crisis or an issue at hand. When these abilities lead to positive and desired gains, it can be a particularly valuable asset for an organization. However, it is also possible for their empathic deficits to lead to negative or overwhelming consequences when driven by self-serving goals or intentions, such as supremacy, veneration, or rivalry (Munro et al. 2005; Schipper and Petersmann 2013). Also, while rating low on empathy, NPD leaders can rate high on motivation to gain power, which can lead them to act unethically or use their position for personal gains (Kernberg 1998; Maccoby 2003). Winner Vs. Loser Dynamic or Friend Vs. Enemy All five protagonists’ narratives highlight their loser-winner dynamic and their intense dislike to be challenged. Palin fired employees who didn’t agree with her and proceeded to lie about them in court when they didn’t support her agenda. It is a well-documented fact that Steve Jobs and Donald Trump fired employees on a whim when being made aware that they were causing damage to their reputation. Dolores Jackson threatened her subordinate Phyllis and her business partner René numerous times. Vindictive narcissists such as Dolores have an innate need to always be right; anyone who challenges their authority becomes an enemy. If someone attempts to fight back against them, they will inevitably go to extreme lengths to destroy their career. The vindictive behaviors and cold-blooded nature of all five individuals are seen in their threats, their thirst for revenge, and the manner in which they are all on guard against the experience of shame. In harsh terms, David Brooks describes NPD individuals as bullies who only experience peace when they are cruel. “Their blood pressure drops the moment they beat the kid on the playground,” he adds. Employees often feel that the NPD leader treats them with contempt, while the NPD leader often feels persecuted and responds with vindictive

144  M.-L. GERMAIN

assaults on the employee’s’ character (Burgo 2015). Inherently competitive, the NPD leader imagines being surrounded by rivals. It is not uncommon for the NPD leader to twist facts and claim to be the victim of injustice and to act like a martyr. The NPD leader perceives any simple disagreement as an attack against her. She becomes envious when others succeed and because of her distorted reality, she believes in the lies she tells herself and others. As she feels shame, she becomes defensive and attacks others to preserve her own sense of self. She may also twist facts to suit her agenda. For example, toward the end of his presidential campaign, Donald Trump embraced the 100-day marker to measure his accomplishments as president. Yet, in light of his less-than-stellar performance a week before his 100 days in office, he assailed the marker as a “ridiculous standard.” Suggested approaches for professional relationships Before becoming vindictive and abusive toward employees, NPD leaders often appear charming and confident. They make employees feel special and desirable, as if they are winners. In order to cope with such seduction, one needs to know oneself well. For most people, the appeal of being liked and complimented is difficult to resist, especially coming from someone in a position of power. But in this case, idealization often has an ugly flip side. “You are prefect” can quickly turn into “you’re worthless” when the NPD leader feels they have gained everything an employee has to offer or when she feels an employee has wronged her. Generally speaking, it is wise to question anyone who idealizes another person early on in a work relationship. Also, during the “charming” stage of a relationship, NPD individuals will seek out personal information about others, pretending to be interested in them, when in reality they are building a library of information to be vindictively used against them during the devaluating stage. For instance, if an employee confides in an NPD leader something as trivial as that he had trouble learning a foreign language while in Kindergarten, the NPD leader may use that information in the devaluation stage, telling that employee that his cognitive deficiencies at an early age in life explain his limited life achievements. Classic narcissists such as Donald Trump are rarely sensitive to arguments based on truth and logic. Consequently, reasoning with them is often pointless. NPD leaders are immune to reason and/or pleas for

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

145

sympathy. Sympathizing with an employee would require that they reveal their own shame. Co-workers are burdened with the task of protecting the NPD leaders from the shame that has been unfairly projected onto them; this means taking responsibility for mistakes and occasionally feeling humiliated to preserve their self-image. NPD leaders rarely admit fault. Donald Trump, for instance, is notorious for his unwillingness to apologize after making mistakes and for blaming acts of disloyalty on others rather than self-reflecting on why people may shy away from supporting him. The idea that co-workers may feel treated unfairly is often both foreign and irrelevant to the NPD leader. It is likely that protests of injustice against the NPD leader will be used against the co-workers. The NPD leader may claim that these employees are too sensitive and incompetent for the job. The NPD leader may go as far as demanding an apology from the employees for a problem they did not cause. Remaining a supportive ally is one of the most effective ways to keep the NPD leader’s rage under control even if one disagrees. Colleagues should be careful to not criticize an NPD leader, even if they believe that truth-telling makes for healthier work relationships. These approaches may deflate the narcissist’s rage but they can quickly take a toll on employees’ pride. Employees have to weigh the pros of cons of working with the narcissist by asking themselves, is advancing my career worth the humiliation and the emotional abuse? No one should have to endure emotional abuse to protect or advance one’s career. When they feel wronged, vindictive narcissists like Dolores Jackson can be aggressive and relentless in their quest for revenge. It is crucial for their colleagues to avoid becoming their target. Employees can do so by ensuring that they don’t do anything that may humiliate their leader or wound her self-esteem. In addition, whenever possible, conflicts and disagreements should be avoided. If an employee feels offended by an NPD leader’s lies or triggered by her relentless competition, challenging her will only cause the employee great harm. People may not realize that they are working with vindictive colleagues until they have offended them. If one cannot limit communication with a vindictive leader, cannot afford to resign one’s position, or if there is no clear procedure to report abusive behaviors (such as a hotline) legal recourse may be the only option (Burgo 2015). Even then, most narcissists are skilled at perfecting plausible, sufficient evidence will be needed to expose them. NPD leaders will try to paint the accuser as

146  M.-L. GERMAIN

the wrongdoer and destroy his professional reputation by crafting smear campaigns, as seen in the cases of Ms. Jackson and Mr. Strickland. People who work with NPD leaders should refrain from retaliating or turning the tables as it may only exacerbate the leaders’ assaults. When reporting abusive leader behaviors, victims should stick to the facts and to the truth. As explained in an earlier chapter, when working with an NPD leader, it is recommended that employees: 1. Document everything: They should keep a record of their email and text exchanges with the leader (Malkin 2015). This will allow them to support their case with Human Resources and the court, should a suit be filed for harassment or wrongful termination 2. Rely on third-party witnesses 3. Remain focused on the work tasks 4. Tactfully make the narcissist aware of the good and the bad behaviors 5. Set boundaries and limits 6. Evaluate the progress regularly 7. Contact management and/or Human Resources—Ask if a hotline is available to report abusive employee behaviors. Rather than responding defensively when triggered by the leader’s cruelty, victims should force themselves to respond neutrally and stay focused on the facts. When the NPD leader tries to spin information and change subject, they should re-center the discussion around objective information. When the leader attempts to re-engage colleagues into a battle, they should remain factual, civil, and succinct. When working with an NPD leader, one’s biggest ally is a personal daily log of work task progress in addition to regular discussions with the NPD leader, which should also be documented. Memoranda can also be sent to the NPD leader to document conversations and tasks assigned. As a rule of thumb, one should be aware, continue their work, and keep track of work accomplishments in order to maintain a sense of direction and normalcy. It is also essential to stand up calmly and firmly for oneself. Feeling drained, alienated, and having an overall feeling of dread about going to work are all signs one should pay attention to. If one knows these feelings are triggered by one specific employee at work,

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

147

drafting a plan to address the problem is essential in order to preserve one’s emotional and physical well-being, and career. The NPD leader’s subordinates’ levels of frustration and uneasiness typically increase over time, along with their level of anxiety and powerlessness. Boundaries should be set and accountability strategies sought as soon as abusive treatment occurs. Otherwise, colleagues may fall prey to more demands and unfair treatment. For the extreme NPD leader, constructive feedback is always unwelcomed, good intentions are distorted, and others are positioned as the guilty party. The NPD leader may go as far as using unethical means to salvage their own reputation. Setting boundaries involve deciding when to keep one’s distance from the NPD leader, although having to work directly with her limits the ability to walk away. Furthermore, narcissists do not handle having limits set for them very well. They perceive these as attacks and they often respond viciously. Victims may instinctively be tempted by turning the tables, though this approach may only exacerbate the NPD leader’s attacks. The reader should remember that the NPD leader makes herself a winner at their expense by out-loading feelings of shame and unworthiness and forcing others to carry them. Colleagues of the NPD leader may have the desire to fight back, attempting to engage in a contest in order to prove that they are not the loser, though the best course of action is self-preservation, disengagement, and to polishing one’s résumé. Leaving one’s position may be an ideal option rather than waiting till the NPD leader fires or demotes the subordinate who speaks up about the abuse. The cost of being degraded and dehumanized in a job often far outweighs the cost of perceived risks of unemployment (Payson 2002). However, when leaving one’s job is not an option, subordinates’ only choice may be to steel themselves and control the damage in any way possible. Knowing about the pain and torment that NPD leaders live with may strike our empathy chord and we may feel tempted to give into their tantrums. Seeing these leaders constantly fencing themselves and not having the ability to interact with others in positive ways may make us feel sorry for them. It is important to remember that having empathy for NPDs should not replace the need to protect oneself from their harmful tendencies.

148  M.-L. GERMAIN

On an unconscious level, narcissists feel defective, frightened, and vulnerable. By asserting one’s sense of self, they try to project those feelings onto others instead. The experience is similar to dealing with a sorrowful 5-year old bully who is acting out. As seen earlier in this book, the possibility for growth and change for an NPD individual may depend on the severity of her narcissism (Payson 2002). She must be motivated to change. Regardless of her ability for significant change, she can still reshape her work relationships to ones that are more tolerable and possibly enjoyable for subordinates. Recognizing the dynamics of the NPD leader and learning how to hold one’s own in spite of her defenses is the first step toward a victim’s empowerment and healing. Extreme narcissists rarely seek psychological treatment unless they are legally required to do so (Burgo 2015). Even when they do, they seldom stay in therapy for any extended period of time. If they happen to remain in treatment, it is often the result of their extreme internal pain or sometimes, it is the result of a major life event: the loss of a parent, a divorce, or a work termination. It is not unusual for bullies to have been bullied themselves as children (as it was the case for Steve Jobs), though most bullies will not talk about their childhood traumas for fear of being perceived as defective and dysfunctional. It may take years for them to build a sense of self-esteem. One may ask: since NPD leaders rarely change, what is the point of confronting them? If we don’t confront unhealthy degrees of narcissism in others, we may fail to catch a destructive tendency before it does significant damage (Payson 2002). NPD individuals who have never been confronted and encouraged to engage in self-reflection are vulnerable to acting out their grandiose delusions and, in turn, inflicting injuries onto others. By the time these leaders cross the line into unlawful actions, they have decided that these actions are justified, regardless of society’s perception. Surviving a work relationship with an NPD leader means protecting oneself from never-ending injury; it means disengaging with that leader as much as possible. It also means occasionally being open to the leader’s views without feeling the need to endorse them, ignoring the leader’s helpful suggestions, and offering thanks. Whenever possible, the employee should consider a transfer to another department, making a clean separation from her. Narcissism at Work—Personality Disorders of Corporate Leaders.

7  CASE STUDIES AND PRACTICAL ADVICE 

149

References Barbaro, M. (2016, October 25). What drives Donald Trump? Fear of losing status, Tapes show. The New York Times. Burgo, J. (2015). The Narcissist you know: Defending yourself against extreme narcissists in an all-about-me age. New York: Touchstone. CNN (2016). Trump: All business. Aired on September 05, 2016. D’Antonio, M. (2016). The truth about Trump. New York, NY: A Thomas Dunne Book for St. Martin’s Griffin. Green, J. (2011, June). The tragedy of Sarah Palin. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/06/the-tragedy-ofsarah-palin/308492/. Huffington Post (2016, July). The GOP’s love affair with its “Earthquake In A Box”. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-winship/thegops-love-affair-with_b_10758528.html. Isaacson, W. (2011). Steve Jobs. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kernberg, O. F. (1998). Ideology, conflict and leadership in groups and organizations. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Kroll, J., & Pouncey, C. (2016, June). The ethics of APA’s goldwater rule. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 44(2), 226–235. Kruze, M. (2016, August 19). Jack O’Donnell: I know Trump, and he’s not fit to be president. Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved from http://tucson.com/ news/opinion/column/guest/jack-o-donnell-i-know-trump-and-he-s-not/ article_f17eb3ec-dcb6-5e6b-9803-d7b13a4caeb0.html. Maccoby, M. (2003). The productive narcissist: The promise and peril of visionary leadership. New York, NY: Broadway Books. Malkin, C. (2015). Rethinking Narcissism. The Bad -and Surprisingly Goodabout feeling Special. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Messman, L. (2016). Trump on Trump: “I don’t like to Analyze Myself Because I might not Like What I see”. Retrieved from https://www.vice.com/en_us/ article/exkp7a/trump-tapes-reveals-himself-insecurities-fear-failure-vgtrn. Munro, D., Bore, M., & Powis, D. (2005). Personality factors in professional ethical behaviour: Studies of empathy and narcissism. Australian Journal of Psychology, 57(1), 49–60. NPR. (2011). A ‘You Betcha!’: A Palin with a Mr. Hyde Side. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2011/09/22/140701588/you-betcha-a-palin-with-amr-hyde-side. NPR. (2008). Biographer: Don’t underestimate Gov. Palin. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94152523. Payson, E. D. (2002). The Wizard of Oz and other Narcissists: Coping with the one-way relationship in work, love, and family. Royal Oak, MI: Julian Day Publications.

150  M.-L. GERMAIN Pinto, J. K., & Patanakul, P. (2015). When narcissism drives project champions: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1180–1190. Ronningstam, E. (2009). Narcissistic personality disorder: Facing DSM-V. Psychiatric Annals, 39(3), 111–121. Rubin, J. (2017, February 21). Commentary: Will it soon be Donald Trump vs. Mike Pence? The Washington post. Russ, E., Shedler, J., Bradley, R., & Westen, D. (2008). Refining the construct of narcissistic personality disorder: Diagnostic criteria and subtypes. American Journal of Psychiatry, 165, 1473–1481. Schipper, M., & Petermann, F. (2013). Relating empathy and emotion regulation: Do deficits in empathy trigger emotion dysregulation? Social Neuroscience, 8(1), 101–107. O’Donnell, J. R., & Rutherford, J. (1991). Trumped!: The Inside Story of the Real Donald Trump-His Cunning Rise and Spectacular Fall. New York: Simon & Schuster.

CHAPTER 8

Book Summary and Directions for Future Research

Abstract  Germain provides a condensed version of the information presented in the book, including the main characteristics of NPD leaders, as well as their impact on the business functions of individuals and organizations. She summarizes practical tools that employees working with NPD leaders can use to protect their work relationships, jobs, and careers. The chapter concludes by presenting several directions for future research on the topic of Narcissistic Personality Disorders and leadership. Keywords  Characteristics of NPD leaders · Impact on business functions, individuals and organizations · Practical tools · Protection of work relationships, jobs, and careers · Directions for future research Narcissists are often bullies who have a history of emotional chaos, violence, and early life abuse, which have led them to perpetual feelings of helplessness. In order to survive emotionally, children who grow up amid chaos must fortify their psyche. They often feel defective and spend the better part of their lives trying to escape feelings of inadequacy and inferiority. Narcissism is the direct opposite of healthy self-esteem (Burgo 2015). Children of narcissistic parents employ defense mechanisms, which tend to distort and compromise their lives as adults. Individuals with personality disorders are often misunderstood by the layperson who is in a personal or work relationship with them. They do, nonetheless, have an impact on the people they interact with. The © The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8_8

151

152  M.-L. GERMAIN

study of how they impact colleagues and organizations has significantly increased in the past few decades (Judge et al. 2006). Signs of Narcissistic Personality Disorder develop by early adulthood and are evident in home and work settings throughout the NPD’s life. These signs include a persistent display of grandiosity, a continuous demand for admiration, and an obvious lack of empathy. According to the American Psychiatric Association (2011), NPD individuals may present any five of the nine following standards: 1. Grandiosity and self-importance 2. A fixation about unlimited success, control, brilliance, or beauty 3. A credence that he or she is exceptional and can only be understood by, or should connect with, other extraordinary or important people and institutions 4. Demands unwarranted admiration 5. A sense of entitlement 6. An interpersonally oppressive behavior 7. The absence of empathy 8. A resentment of others or a conviction that others are resentful of him or her 9. A display of egotistical and arrogant behaviors or attitudes.

Extreme Narcissists in the Workplace: Impact on People and Businesses Narcissistic traits are frequently observed in employees in leadership positions, particularly at the upper management and Chief Executive Officer levels. In the past few decades, the amount of research about dysfunctional leadership behaviors has significantly increased, including studies about of leaders’ psychological disorders and mental illnesses. Research supports that there are both destructive and productive forms of narcissism (Kohut 1996; Kets de Vries and Miller 1997; Maccoby 2000, 2003) and that NPD leaders are more damaging to the organization, culture, morale, and work relationships than inadequate skills, especially in the medium to long term (Kets de Vries 1993; Collins 2001; Benson and Hogan 2008; Higgs 2009). Leadership roles attract NPD individuals because it allows them to receive attention and admiration from others. When we select employees to fill leadership positions, we often assume that we make informed decisions about who will be most effective. However, research by Ong et al. (2016) suggests otherwise. In fact,

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

153

the leaders we are more likely to select are often individuals who display narcissistic traits. These individuals have high levels of confidence, are focused on themselves at the expense of others, and tend to be vain. Those with high scores on narcissism tests believe that they are not only extremely special, but also inherently superior to others and are skilled at inflating their achievements. However, thus far, no research study has supported that narcissists are effective long-term leaders (Rosenthal and Pittinsky 2006). Ineffective leaders often bear the brunt of the blame when things go awry. Their ineffectiveness as leaders is correlated with their ranking on the narcissism spectrum. Therefore, particular attention should be given to the people who are hired to become organizational leaders and to those who are promoted into executive positions. Although narcissists may seem to be excellent leaders initially, they generally end up being a poor choice eventually. NPD leaders will boast about their ability to work under pressure, engage in challenging tasks, or perform in front of other people (Wallace and Baumeister 2002). However, when they believe that there are no opportunities for them to meet their personal goals, they often exert little effort and perform far below expectations (Woodman et al. 2011). Because NPDs are intensely fixated on attaining personal glory and place their interests ahead of others’, they rarely work well in a team setting. Paradoxically, while they may not work well with others, they can make excellent team leaders but only in the short-term.

Teamwork Using the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), a standard narcissism questionnaire used in psychology research (Raskin and Terry 1988), one can successfully assess an individual’s degree of narcissism (Braun et al. 2015). Examples of statements used in the instrument include, “If I ruled the world it would be a much better place” and “I am an extraordinary person.” Braun et al.’s study shows that individuals scoring higher on the initial narcissism test can be rated as very effective leaders early in their role. However, as time progressed, these initially effective leaders begin to receive ratings that deemed them poor leaders and eventually, completely ineffective leaders. Braun et al. (2015) were quite surprised at the speed in which these individuals received plummeting ratings from their team members, as well as the intensity of their team members’ negative perception of them. While narcissists begin on

154  M.-L. GERMAIN

top, their leadership effectiveness quickly met its demise. Braun and colleagues also assert that the initial attraction felt by the team to the narcissist is much due to her charm and overall vision for specific projects, which prompts her to evolve as a “natural” leader. However, as she fails to challenge and encourage her team members, she eventually fails as an effective leader. Yet, research has also shown that if NPD individuals are able to employ the characteristics that make them effective, such as charisma, in combination with other important traits like empathy and modesty, they may be able to succeed as effective leaders (Owens, Wallace, & Waldman, 2015). In fact, narcissistic traits like charm are often very useful and even sometimes necessary for certain career situations, like those requiring diplomatic skills. Unfortunately, this logic may not transfer to extreme narcissists who simply have no capacity for assessing how others perceive them. Having to decide between leaders that we “like” for the short term and leaders who we genuinely feel can effectively get the job done long term can be quite challenging. Dealing with this paradoxical decision adequately is crucial for guaranteeing effective leadership for the long term. Because NPD leaders can become toxic to organizations and destructive of employee morale, employees working under them need to have the ability to recognize and comprehend the difference between healthy and unhealthy sharing, in addition to being able to identify the basic characteristics of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

Signs of NPD Because NPD individuals do not fully have a sense of self, they often view others as an extension of themselves. NPD individuals lack boundaries and employ behaviors that serve to influence colleagues into losing their own boundaries. They accomplish this by using manipulative tactics such as admiration and idealization, distraction, intimidation, martyr, devaluation, double-binding, recurrent criticism, rejection, or emotional hostage. • Admiration and Idealization: The dynamic of admiration and idealization can be seen when NPD individuals attract others and admire their level of success, money, status, or any other unique characteristics. In addition, they may distance themselves from others until

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

155

they believe that the proper reciprocation of admiration is occurring. They may woo their colleagues and shower them with attention if it is believed that these colleagues possess something useful to the NPDs. NPDs are so accomplished at this seduction that it is likely irresistible to the recipients. • Distraction: Employing distraction tactics offers NPDs the ability to redirect attention to themselves and/or refocus conversation subjects in a manner that benefits them. • Intimidation: The use of intimidation (subtle or not) deals with power and using that power to force others to act in a complying manner. • Martyr and Guilt: The martyr and guilt manipulation technique involves the portrayal of suffering by NPDs in order to evoke care and concern from others. If proper care or concern is not expressed, NPDs will act reproachfully. • Devaluation: This consists in demoralizing or demeaning the thoughts, capabilities, or emotional well-being of others by way of criticism (subtly or obviously) while simultaneously boosting themselves. • Double-binding: In this method of manipulation, subtle contradictory messages are conveyed by the NPDs, saying one thing while doing the opposite. Victims of this technique often obtain disapproval for not reacting to the contradictory message. • Recurrent Criticism: This utilizes a cycle of dialogue that begins and ends with the never-ending critique of others’ thoughts or opinions, especially if these thoughts or opinions differ from the NPDs’. • Projection: Rooted in the NPDs’ insufficiency and self-hatred, projection is aimed outward with the NPDs seeing colleagues as being imperfect, rather than looking at themselves. NPDs may respond to such imperfections by being aggressively critical of other employees and fueled by self-righteousness. • Emotional Hostage: Emotional hostage exists as the concluding phase of victimization, which occurs when the NPDs’ victims have a completely depleted self-esteem that they no longer are capable of validating their reality because they have not set personal limits. Working closely with NPD leaders can cause faltering self-confidence and increase doubt regarding one’s reality. Ultimately, the victims often become emotional hostages to the NPDs in that they will feel unable to escape or defend themselves.

156  M.-L. GERMAIN

Setting Boundaries Those who work with NPD leaders need to set protective boundaries in order to limit the behaviors of entitlement and devaluation by NPD leaders. First and foremost, the employee must be aware of these behaviors and maintain his own original thoughts and feelings. NPD leaders tend to choose employees that they can easily manipulate and mold to be whatever they need. They also tend to over-gratify the “chosen employee” while presuming that other employees will fail at their job. Generally, NPD leaders will act entirely in a positive or in a negative manner. A negative interaction includes the dismissal or ignorance of subordinates, causing them to feel resentful and feeling treated unfairly by the NPD leader, especially compared to the “chosen employee.” The “chosen employee” who has worked for extended periods of time with the NPD leader will often experience anxiety, lowered self-esteem, decreased energy, depression, various addictions, health issues, and compulsive behaviors. In order to promote awareness and healing, it is crucial to acknowledge these types of symptoms in employees. Setting boundaries and emphasizing personal needs (including a respect for one’s choices, emotions, and thoughts) is crucial for self-preservation when interacting with an NPD leader. The most effective way for subordinates to set boundaries is by recognizing the NPDs’ methods of defensive manipulation, as this will improve the overall interactions that occur these leaders. Setting boundaries also allow victims of the NPDs’ manipulation to tend to broken selfesteem and maximize the working relationship. Communicating and setting limits will also allow for subordinates to avoid the possibility of falling into being an emotional hostage and feign off feelings of resentment once the NPDs leader is no longer around. Since competitive environments are where NPD leaders thrive, in their ascent to power they will often wreak havoc on all other employees around them. Behaviors of NPD leaders may include failing to recognize subordinates for a job done well, taking credit that others deserve, prioritizing personal agenda over everything else, undermining co-workers in front of others, impairing others’ ability to advance, sending double messages, expressing unclear or unfair expectations of others, and setting up others to act as scapegoats.

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

157

Impact on Co-workers of NPDs These behaviors can have a devastating effect on subordinates of NPD leaders. They often feel drained after interacting with NPDs, have frequent self-doubt, are uncertain about work expectations, are unable to focus on personal work agenda, are increasingly anxious, feel resentful and powerless, experience burnout, and believe they cannot change their job circumstances. When subordinates feel they cannot receive any support or reassurance from their NPD leader, and when they fear discussing work-related issues with the NPD leader, it is advised that they set boundaries and employ survival tactics for self-care to salvage their selfesteem and their career.

Self-preservation Tactics Include • Set time limits for listening to the NPD leader • Rehearse exit strategies • Limit praise and support given to NPD leader • Limit the sharing of personal ideas and knowledge outside of basic work requirements (as these may be used against the subordinate and simply stolen by the NPD leader) • Prepare defensive responses and stay aware of guilt responses • Seek an outside support system • Keep a daily log of work activities • Record memos when attending meetings • Make appropriate alterations to plans and matters related to work performance • Carbon-copy other people who are participating in a discussion or a work project • In the face of devaluation, ensure that a third party is present for any significant interactions • Begin searching for a new position • Remain proactive by recognizing not only the damaging facets of one’s work and personal life. It is vital for subordinates and peers of NPD leaders to set stringent limits and acknowledge that some expectations are unrealistic. Although a subordinate may not be able to change the nature of NPD leaders or

158  M.-L. GERMAIN

alter their deep-seated narcissistic defenses, setting limits will eliminate possible feelings of resentment and regret and will help the subordinate regain energy and a more optimistic perspective. NPD leaders high on the narcissistic spectrum often cross the line into criminal behavior, acting out on feelings of rage. They have a tendency to enter into work relationships behaving charismatically but ultimately end up contributing to a toxic work environment. Unfortunately, healthy and long-lasting relationships with NPD leaders are generally impossible. The techniques presented above can assist subordinates in self-preserving for the subordinate and they may help establish a slightly more functional relationship with the NPD leader. Even though NPD leaders rarely change, the needs of their subordinates to grow professionally will pale in comparison with the level of toxicity created by NPD leaders. NPD leaders are generally incapable of providing long-term attention, encouragement, and empathy toward their colleagues. It can be helpful to accept the truth regarding the work relationship before too much time has passed or before the feeling of loss becomes too intense. Once a victim becomes aware and disengages or leaves the relationship with the NPD leader, the leader seeks other victims.

Social Impact NPD leaders are often attracted to people of a high societal class who are successful and think very highly of themselves (Miller, Widiger, & Campbell 2010). But these relationships may be short-lived because of the NPD’s constant desire for admiration, and relentlessness in always seeking something better (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013). NPD individuals often exhibit an unforgiving nature and express feelings of antagonism and aggression in relationships (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013). People who interact with NPD individuals often find themselves drained of energy because of the NPD’s self-absorption, which translates into the demeaning or criticizing of others. Their victims eventually suffer from an erosion of self-esteem. NPD leaders have a difficult time understanding the feelings of others, if they even care to understand them. They are, after all, in a relentless hunt to guarantee their narcissistic supply of attention, approval, admiration, prestige, understanding, encouragement, power, perfection, or money. Although most people require all of these items to some extent,

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

159

the level to which an NPD individual requires them is abnormally high and often pursued through manipulation. Generally, NPD individuals are unable to engage in self-reflection, assume ownership of a problem, tolerate disapproval or criticism, see others as being their own persons with free will, empathize with others, recognize the needs of others, control anger or rage, acknowledge accomplishments of other due to persistent feelings of envy, feel remorse, or offer genuine apologies. Furthermore, they express high levels of entitlement and expect special considerations. They manipulate co-workers to reach personal goals and they are tenacious, critical, grandiose, and compulsive. NPD leaders also have a tendency to set unrealistic expectations for others. They overestimate their own worth and value, believe they are more special than others, they aggressively pursue prestige, power, money, respect, and beauty, and have a dichotomous approach to life (all or nothing). While most of us will occasionally want these things, and behave in these ways, NPD leaders require the majority of these items in abundance and at a high frequency. They often also have an inability to reciprocate or employ a balance of give and take as they believe that their needs are more unique or more important that others’. Overt NPD ­leaders obtain narcissistic necessities from others with their charisma, and their showcasing of status, money, or power. They are often described as “divas.” On the other hand, covert NPD leaders gain their narcissistic supplies via their charm, admiration, status, and control through a role that is linked to more significant cause, such as expert professionals. Although NPD individuals often exude confidence and charm, coworkers will eventually come to see the decidedly one-way nature of their relationship. Employees who work with NPDs often have feelings of annoyance, perplexity, fear of engagement, abandonment, isolation, incompetence, estrangement from other employees, disempowerment, and extreme burnout. Those working closely with NPD leaders must strive to recognize the inability of the leaders to offer support or engage in any sort of give and take. They must also strive for emotional healing, identifying, validating, and empathizing with feelings of being wounded, and setting strict boundaries with the NPDs. One of the most challenging things for people working with NPD leaders is the lack of validation received by outside sources for the massive problems that are ensuing under the surface at work. Most people who are not intrinsically involved with the NPD leader will only see the larger-than-life persona, smooth

160  M.-L. GERMAIN

demeanor, and self-confidence rather than the devastating narcissistic tendencies that they possess. Because they are highly materialistic, self-enhancing, entitled, and impetuous, NPD individuals are often unable to learn from their mistakes and they often find themselves in serious trouble, notably legal and disciplinary (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013). These coping mechanisms can bring about trouble in both their personal and work lives. When this happens, we may see a pattern of great work success followed by a loss of employment and a subsequent geographic relocation.

Treatment for Narcissistic Personality Disorder The core of treating NPD lies in individual psychotherapy, consisting mainly of psychoanalytic psychotherapy. As seen in previous chapters, very few NPD individuals take the initiative to start therapeutic treatment, and if they do, very few follow through with it beyond the first few sessions. This is likely because NPD leaders are hesitant to confront personal shortcomings. If they do in fact follow through with treatment, it is often because of legal requirements. Types of therapy that are appropriate in this context include family therapy, group therapy, couples’ therapy, and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). No medications are indicated for treating Narcissistic Personality Disorder, though given that patients commonly have other psychiatric conditions such as depression, anxiety, or other mood disorders, they may benefit from selected psychotropic medications, such as antidepressants, antipsychotics, or mood stabilizers (Ronningstam and Weinberg 2013).

Psychotherapy Workplace environments preclude the possibility of providing psychotherapeutic treatment to employees for several reasons. First, employees are legally protected from being labeled as disordered (under the ADA and the EEOC). If employees were to be diagnosed, they may require special accommodations, which may be detrimental to both the labeled NPD leader and the organization. Also, such disorders require expert knowledge and must therefore be diagnosed by mental health professionals who are knowledgeable in assessing such personality disorders. With the individual psychoanalytic psychotherapy approach, much debate exists between two key schools of thought: Kernberg’s and

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

161

Kohut’s. They differ in the role of the therapist in treating NPD patients. Kernberg suggests that a direct confrontation of the NPD patient during therapy is more effective because it eliminates or weakens the patient’s grandiosity. Alternatively, Kohut is in favor of a more empathic role, one that encourages the patient’s grandiosity, thus strengthening the patient’s naturally deficient self-image (Gildersleeve 2012). A combination of both methods is fairly common when dealing with NPD patients.

Directions for Future Research Despite the negative qualifiers, the narcissism of some senior executives offers significant benefits to organizations in terms of performance outcomes and goal attainment (Conger 1999).In order to reap these benefits and minimize negative aspects, organizations ought to first create awareness for identifying and addressing NPD leaders’ potential destructive behaviors in order to protect direct co-workers of NPD leaders. Dysfunctional leaders can be very high functioning, powerful contributors, and key innovators but it is important to harness their talent while at the same time softening their destructive tendencies. Doing so will likely benefit the leaders, the leader’s colleagues, and the organization. Learning to effectively deal with personality-disordered leadership behaviors may ultimately result in a higher return on investment. The research topic of personality disorders in the workplace has a bright future at least in the fields of mental health and business. First, further research is needed regarding the recruitment and selection of narcissists into leadership roles. It may shine light on their effectiveness. For example, “Should limited resources be expended to actively avoid hiring NPD leaders?” Second, the effectiveness of leaders should be explored beyond the executive level of the organization to better understand how NPD leaders are recruited, developed, and promoted within organizations (Higgs 2009). Third, researchers should focus on developing intervention techniques. The potential for negative long-term consequences on workers’ morale and work climate makes it imperative for organizations to have interventions safeguarding against the destructive nature of pathological narcissism in leaders. Fourth, further empirical research is needed to underpin the topic of narcissistic leadership and its internal impact on followers and on

162  M.-L. GERMAIN

organizational outcomes. We also need to understand how narcissistic tendencies may emerge and develop throughout a leadership career. This would help in designing processes to spot NPD tendencies in employees and to develop appropriate interventions (Higgs 2009). Fifth, as Grijalva and colleagues (Grijalva et al. 2015) have suggested, research on personality disorders should focus on gathering empirical support for clarifying the connection between narcissism and leadership by fixating on narcissism’s sub-dimensions. Sixth, insight into how NPD leaders gain support for their destructive leadership may be obtained from investigating the enablers of narcissistic behaviors. The organizational culture or socially based interactions that allow for these specific NPD behaviors to thrive should also be explored. Seventh, while it remains unclear whether specific employees have a propensity for enjoying more highly rewarding work relationships with narcissistic leaders, exploring what type of employees NPD leaders are drawn to (for instance, self-confident employees who stand up for themselves vs. docile colleagues who never oppose their leaders [Grijalva and Harms 2014]) would be thought-provoking. Ultimately, researchers need to further explore the various dyadic relationships that ensue between narcissistic leaders and their respective subordinates while incorporating interpersonal theories like leader–member exchange (LMX) (Ferris et al. 2009). Eighth, there is a need for academics and practitioners to explore narcissism’s relationship with the hierarchical level a leader possesses within an organization (that is, low-level, mid-level, or upper-level management), various leader behaviors (such as consideration, initiating structure, abusive supervision), objective versus subjective ratings of leadership, and the organizational climate (such as organizations that encourage teamwork/collaboration versus those with a more competitive inclination). Ninth, research on ways to guide narcissistic leaders through the process of avoiding pitfalls in the workplace is in high demand. Very few NPD leaders look inward and even fewer psychoanalysts get to work with NPDs in workplace settings.NPD leaders can choose an anchor employee who serves to keep them grounded and rooted in reality. That is assuming that the chosen anchor person understands the functioning of the NPD leader, is able to help the NPD leader accept new ideas, and is able to manage the relationship without losing himself. Understanding the optimal characteristics of such anchor employees may help manage

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

163

the behavior of NPD leaders and in turn, may prevent turnover in the NPD leader’s department. We have seen that NPD leaders have both strengths and weaknesses. They attract followers by their pretense of invincibility (mostly through language), have great vision (Maccoby 2003), and thrive in chaotic times. They are also highly dependent on their followers for affirmation and adulation as they are uncomfortable with their emotions. They are particularly sensitive to criticism, poor listeners, and lousy mentors. They have a flagrant lack of empathy, and an intense desire to compete, which can create more tension than necessary in time of crisis. Furthermore, they want everyone else to support their ideas, want to control others more than they can discipline themselves, and they seek out risky behavior while ignoring the cost. Even the most productive NPD leaders can self-destruct and lead their organizations terribly astray.

Suggested Readings and Audio-Visual Resources Faust: The First Part of the Tragedy (1808) Written by German playwright Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. Synopsis Faust is the protagonist of a classic German legend. He is a scholar who is highly successful yet dissatisfied with his life, leading him to make a pact with the Devil to exchange his soul for unlimited knowledge and worldly pleasures. Big Eyes (2014) Synopsis In the late 1950s and early 1960s, artist Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz) achieves unbelievable fame and success with his creation of portraits of saucer-eyed waifs. However, no one realizes that his wife, Margaret (Amy Adams), is the real painter behind the brush. Although Margaret is horrified to learn that Walter is passing off her work as his own, she is too meek to protest in any significant manner. It isn’t until the Keanes’ marriage comes to an end, and a lawsuit follows, that the truth finally is revealed. http://bigeyesfilm.com/.

164  M.-L. GERMAIN

Catch Me if You Can (2002) Synopsis Frank Abagnale, Jr. (Leonardo DiCaprio) worked as a doctor, a lawyer, and as a co-pilot for a major airline—all before his 18th birthday. A master of deception, he was also a brilliant forger, a skill that granted him his first real claim to fame: becoming the most successful bank robber in the history of the USA by the age of 17. FBI Agent Carl Hanratty (Tom Hanks) makes it his prime mission to capture Frank and bring him to justice, but Frank is always one step ahead of him. Citizen Kane (1941) Synopsis When a reporter is assigned to decipher newspaper magnate Charles Foster Kane’s dying words, his investigation gradually reveals the fascinating portrait of a complex man who rose from obscurity to staggering heights. Though Kane’s friend and colleague, Jedediah Leland, and his mistress, Susan Alexander, shed fragments of light on Kane’s life, the reporter fears he may never penetrate the mystery of the illusive man’s final word, “Rosebud.” Gaslight (1944) Synopsis After the death of her famous opera-singing aunt, Paula (Ingrid Bergman) is sent to study in Italy to become a great opera singer as well. While there, she falls in love with the charming Gregory Anton (Charles Boyer) and the two return to London, where Paula begins to notice strange goings-on: missing pictures, strange footsteps in the night, and gaslights that dim without being touched. As she fights to retain her sanity, her new husband’s intentions come into question. Gone Girl (2014) Synopsis In Carthage, Mo., former New York-based writer Nick Dunne and his glamorous wife Amy present a portrait of a blissful marriage to the

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

165

public. However, when Amy goes missing on the couple’s fifth wedding anniversary, Nick becomes the prime suspect in her disappearance. The resulting police pressure and media frenzy cause the Dunnes’ image of a happy union to crumble, leading to tantalizing questions about who Nick and Amy truly are. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) Synopsis The follow-up to “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” finds young wizard Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) and his friends, Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson), facing new challenges during their second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry as they try to discover a dark force that is terrorizing the school. House of Cards (US Television Series)(2013) Synopsis US Rep. Francis Underwood of South Carolina starts out as a ruthless politician seeking revenge. Promised the post of Secretary of State in exchange for his support, his efforts help to ensure the election of Garrett Walker to the presidency. But Walker changes his mind before the inauguration, telling Underwood he’s too valuable in Congress. Outwardly, Underwood accepts his marching orders, but secretly, he and his wife, an environmental activist, make a pact to destroy Walker and his allies. Based on the U.K. miniseries of the same name, the US version offers a look behind the scenes at the greed and corruption in American politics. Jobs (2013) Synopsis College dropout Steve Jobs (Ashton Kutcher), together with his friend, technical whiz-kid Steve Wozniak (Josh Gad), spark a revolution in home computers with the invention of the Apple 1 in 1976. Built in the garage of Jobs’ parents, the device—and the subsequent formation of Apple Inc.—has changed the world for all time. Though he is viewed as

166  M.-L. GERMAIN

a visionary, Jobs’ tenure as Apple’s leader was a rocky one, leading to his eventual ouster from the company he co-founded. http://jobsthefilm. com/. Shame (2011) Synopsis Successful and handsome New Yorker Brandon (Michael Fassbender) seems to live an ordinary life, but he hides a terrible secret behind his mask of normalcy: Brandon is a sex addict. His constant need for gratification numbs him to just about everything else. But, when Sissy (Carey Mulligan), Brandon’s needy sister, unexpectedly blows into town, crashes at his apartment, and invades his privacy, Brandon is finally forced to confront his addiction head-on. The Devil Wears Prada (2006) Synopsis Andy (Anne Hathaway) is a recent college graduate with big dreams. Upon landing a job at prestigious Runway magazine, she finds herself the assistant to diabolical editor Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep). Andy questions her ability to survive her grim tour as Miranda’s whipping girl without getting scorched. Wall Street (1987) Synopsis A young and impatient stockbroker is willing to do anything to get to the top, including trading on illegal inside information taken through a ruthless and greedy corporate raider, who takes the youth under his wing. Working Girl (1998) Synopsis When a secretary’s idea is stolen by her boss, she seizes an opportunity to steal it back by pretending she has her boss’s job.

8  BOOK SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 

167

References American Psychiatric Association. (2011). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Washington DC: Author. Benson, M. J., & Hogan, R. S. (2008). How dark side leadership personality destroys trust and degrades organisational effectiveness. Organisations and People, 15(3),10–18. Bernstein, A. (2013). Emotional Vampires at Work: Dealing with Bosses and Coworkers Who Drain you Dry (1st ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education. Braun, S., Aydin, N., Frey, D., & Peus, C. (2015). Leader narcissism predicts malicious envy and supervisor-targeted counterproductive work behavior: Evidence from field and experimental research. Journal of Business Ethics, 135, 1–17. doi: 10.1007/s10551-016-3224-5. Burgo, J. (2015). The Narcissist You Know: Defending Yourself Against Extreme Narcissists in an All-About-Me Age. New York, NY: Touchstone. Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider’s perspective on these developing streams of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 145–179. Collins, J. (2001). Good to great. New York: Collins. DuBrin, A. J. (2012). Narcissism in the Workplace: Research, opinion, and practice. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Ferris, G. R., Liden, R. C., Munyon, T. P., Summers, J. K., Basik, K. J., & Buckley, M. R. (2009). Relationships at work: Toward a multidimensional conceptualization of dyadic work relationships. Journal of Management, 35, 1379–1403. Furnham, A. (2015). Backstabbers and bullies: How to cope with the dark side of people at work. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. Gildersleeve, M. (2012). Demystifying Paradoxical Characteristics of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 34(4), 403– 404. Grijalva, E., & Harms, P. D. (2014). Narcissism: An integrative synthesis and dominance complementarity model. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(2), 108–127. Grijalva, E., Harms, P. D., Newman, D. A., Gaddis, B. H., & Fraley, R. C. (2015). Narcissism and leadership: A meta-analytic review of linear and nonlinear relationships. Personnel Psychology, 68(1), 1–47. Higgs, M. (2009). The good, the bad and the ugly: Leadership and narcissism. Journal of change management, 9(2), 165–178. Judge, T. A., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2006). Loving yourself abundantly: Relationship of the narcissistic personality to self- and other perceptions of

168  M.-L. GERMAIN workplace deviance, leadership, and task and contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 762–776. Kets de Vries, M. F. R., & Miller, D. (1997). Leaders who self-destruct: The causes and cures. In R. P. Vecchio (Ed.), Leadership: Understanding the dynamics of power and influence in organizations (pp. 233–245). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1993). Leaders, fools and imposters: Essays on the psychology of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kohut, H. (1996). Forms and transformations of narcissism. Journal of the Americas Psychoanalytical Association, 14, 243–272. Maccoby, M. (2000). Narcissistic leaders: The incredible pros, the inevitable cons. Harvard Business Review, 82, 92–101. Maccoby, M. (2003). The Productive Narcissist: The Promise and Peril of Visionary Leadership. New York, NY: Broadway Books. Miller, J. D., Widiger, T. A., & Campbell, W. K. (2010). Narcissistic personality disorder and the DSM-V. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119(4), 640. Ong, C. W., Roberts, R., Arthur, C. A., Woodman, T., & Akehurst, S. (2016). The leader ship is sinking: A temporal investigation of narcissistic leadership. Journal of Personality, 84, 237–247. doi:10.1111/jopy.12155. Owens, B. P., Wallace, A. S., & Waldman, D. A. (2015). Leader narcissism and follower outcomes: The counterbalancing effect of leader humility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(4), 1203–1213. Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal-components analysis of the narcissistic personality inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 890. Ronningstam, E., & Weinberg, I. (2013, Spring). Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Progress in Recognition and Treatment. The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry, XI(2), 167–177. Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 617–633. Wallace, H. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2002). The performance of narcissists rises and falls with perceived opportunity for glory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), 819. Woodman, T., Roberts, R., Hardy, L., Callow, N., & Rogers, C. H. (2011). There is an “I” in TEAM: Narcissism and social loafing. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(2), 285–290.

Appendix

Resources for victims of narcissist abuse and for human resource ­professionals Workplace Bullying Institute: http://www.workplacebullying.org/ Healthy Workplace Bill: http://healthyworkplacebill.org/ International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment (IAWBH): http://www.iawbh.org/ Society for Occupational Health Psychology: http://www.sohponline.org/ Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM): www.shrm.org Society of Organizational and Industrial Psychology (SIOP): www.siop.org Titles and descriptions come from the APA Center for Organizational Excellence’s Amazon Associates Store.

Bullying and Harassment in the Workplace: Developments in Theory, Research, and Practice (2011) Edited by Stale Einarsen, Helge Hoel, Dieter Zapf and Cary L. Cooper Edited by leading experts and presenting contributions from pioneers in their respective subject areas, the book is an up-to-date researchbased resource on key aspects of workplace bullying and its remediation. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8

169

170  Appendix

The book presents a comprehensive review of the literature, the empirical findings, the theoretical developments, and the experience and advice of leading international academics and practitioners. The book explores a variety of explanatory models and presents available empirical evidence that sheds light on where, when and why bullying develops. It contains a wide range of contributions on the possible remedies for prevention and minimization of the problem for management when it occurs, and for healing the wounds and scars it may have left on those exposed.

Preventing Workplace Bullying: An Evidence-Based Guide for Managers and Employees (2011) By Carlo Caponecchia and Anne Wyatt Workplace bullying is more common and costly than most people realize. It can make life unbearable for employees in any industry and ultimately undermine an organization’s potential for profit. In this practical guide, Carlo Caponecchia and Anne Wyatt explain how to identify workplace bullying and apply best practices to its prevention and management. Caponecchia and Wyatt outline what constitutes bullying at work, demystify some of the controversial issues and discuss the various factors which influence workplace bullying. The responsibilities of management and legal implications are outlined and supported with best practice guides for policies, complaints procedures and risk management systems.

Workplace Bullying: Symptoms and Solutions (2012) Edited by Noreen Tehrani This book explores the impact of bullying from the perspective of both the employee and the organization in which they work. In addition to describing the negative outcome of bullying, Workplace Bullying also looks at ways to promote resilience and the opportunity for growth and learning to take place. Divided into four sections, this book covers the impact and symptoms of workplace bullying; individual interventions; organizational interventions and underlying causes and future ­considerations.

Appendix

  171

The Violence-Prone Workplace: A New Approach to Dealing with Hostile, Threatening, and Uncivil Behavior (2001) By Richard V. Denenberg and Mark Braverman Almost every week reports of violence erupting in the workplace make headlines. Contrary to popular opinion, such incidents are not random and senseless but, according to Richard V. Denenberg and Mark Braverman, typically result from conflict that has been allowed to fester. Combining the insights of both crisis management and dispute resolution, their book presents a comprehensive look at the problem of violence on the job, including ways of preventing it. The authors describe underlying factors in the workplace which can foster extreme behavior and prevent an effective response. Calling for early intervention in situations that could result in violence, they suggest specific techniques for reducing the risk that arises from threats or a climate of hostility. An extensive appendix provides government guidelines and sample policies intended to serve as templates for violence-prevention plans.

Mobbing: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace (1999) By Noa Davenport, Ruth Distler Schwartz and Gail Pursell Elliott Every day, capable, hardworking, committed employees suffer emotional abuse at their workplace. Some flee from jobs they love, forced out by mean-spirited co-workers, subordinates or superiors—often with the tacit approval of higher management. Mobbing is a “ganging up” by several individuals, to force someone out of the workplace through rumor, innuendo, intimidation, discrediting and particularly, humiliation. Mobbing affects the mental and physical health of victims. It extracts staggering costs from victims, their families and from organizations. This book helps readers understand what mobbing is, why it occurs, how it affects a victim and organizations and what people can do. An overview of the literature and research is provided, as well as many practical strategies to help the victims, managers, healthcare workers, and legal professionals.

172  Appendix

Mobbing: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions (2012) By Maureen Duffy and Len Sperry Duffy and Sperry provide a wealth of research to demonstrate the devastating toll that mobbing takes on its victims, their families and the organizations where it occurs. The authors painstakingly avoid simplistic solutions to mobbing, such as removing the “bad apples,” and instead, move the conversation forward by showing how bold and compassionate organizational leadership is required to improve conditions for the benefit of both individuals and their organizations.

Overcoming Mobbing: A Recovery Guide Aggression and Bullying (2014)

for Workplace

By Maureen Duffy and Len Sperry Overcoming Mobbing is an informative, comprehensive guidebook written for the victims of mobbing and their families. In an engaging and reader-friendly style, mobbing experts Maureen Duffy and Len Sperry help readers to make sense of the experience and mobilize resources for recovery. Demystifying the experience of mobbing through the use of examples and case studies, Overcoming Mobbing provides effective strategies for recovery from mobbing as well as for prevention. More than a simple self-help book, this guide offers a detailed presentation of the causes and consequences of mobbing, helps readers avoid falling into the trap of misplacing blame and holds organizations at the center of responsibility for preventing this devastating type of abuse. In addition to those who have experienced mobbing, this book is a valuable resource for managers and human resources personnel who wish to prevent or reverse mobbing within their own professional settings.

the

The Bully at Work: What You Can Do to Stop Hurt and Reclaim Your Dignity on the Job (2009)

By Gary Namie and Ruth Namie In this completely updated new edition based on an updated survey of workplace issues, the authors explore new grounds of bullying in

Appendix

  173

the twenty-first century workplace. Gary and Ruth Namie, pioneers of the Campaign Against Workplace Bullying, teach the reader personal strategies to identify allies, build their confidence and stand up to the ­tormentor—or decide when to walk away with their sanity and dignity intact.

The Bully-Free Workplace: Stop Jerks, Weasels, and Snakes From Killing Your Organization (2011) By Gary Namie and Ruth Namie A guidebook for employers that discusses workplace bullying. Managers will learn how and why to stop bullying; prepare executives to lead the campaign and to resist undermining efforts of subordinates; and create a new, positive role for human resources. Outlining the required steps, The Bullying-Free Workplace includes information on how to create a preventive policy that brings consequences, when violated. The authors discourage half-hearted, short-term fixes that are prevalent today, and present a methodology to successfully protect employee health.

Workplace Bullying: What We Know, Who is to Blame, and What Can We Do? (2001) By Charlotte Rayner, Helge Hoel and Cary L. Cooper A variety of well-publicized surveys have revealed that workplace ­bullying is an issue endemic in working life in Britain; and, at a conservative estimate, over half the working population can expect to experience bullying at work (either directly by being bullied, or through witnessing it) at some stage in their careers. The recognition of the problem and the emergence of court cases have both served to focus employers on the need to deal with the issue. Workplace Bullying is derived from the largest survey ever carried out on workplace bullying, supported by the CBI, TUC, Federation of Small Businesses, IPD and the HSE among others. This study covered 5500 people, but the book goes beyond it to explore all the issues associated with what is becoming a major issue in ­organizations.

174  Appendix

Snakes

in Suits:

When Psychopaths Go

to Work

(2007)

By Paul Babiak and Robert D. Hare Researchers Paul Babiak and Robert Hare have long studied psychopaths. Hare, the author of Without Conscience, is a world-renowned expert on psychopathy, and Babiak is an industrial-organizational psychologist. Recently the two came together to study how psychopaths operate in corporations, and the results were surprising. They found that it’s exactly the modern, open, more flexible corporate world, in which high risks can equal high profits, that attracts psychopaths. Snakes in Suits is a compelling, frightening and scientifically sound look at exactly how psychopaths work in the corporate environment: what kinds of companies attract them, how they negotiate the hiring process and how they function day by day.

The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t (2007) By Robert I. Sutton In a landmark Harvard Business Review essay, Stanford Professor Robert Sutton showed how assholes weren’t just an office nuisance, but a serious and costly threat to corporate success and employee health. In his book, Sutton reveals their huge cost in today’s corporations, shows how to spot them and provides a “self-test.” And he offers tips that you can use to keep your “inner jerk” from rearing its ugly head. Sutton then uses in-depth research and analysis to show how managers can eliminate mean-spirited and unproductive behavior to generate a newly ­productive-workplace.

Index

A Abuse/abusive, 10, 11, 13, 72, 79, 90, 92, 97, 100, 102, 103, 105–107, 145, 147, 151 American Psychiatrist Association, 121 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 33–35, 108, 160 Assessment, 5, 29–32, 93 B Boundaries, 90, 95, 96, 147, 154, 156, 157 Bully/bullying, 2, 5, 46, 57, 74, 78, 82, 83, 87, 96, 101, 103–105, 109, 130, 133, 136, 148 C Career, 5, 6, 49, 60, 74, 81, 93, 94, 98, 101, 107, 129, 143, 145, 147, 154, 157, 162 Child/Children, 3, 11, 72–74, 77, 122, 128, 132, 133, 135, 141, 148, 151 Childhood, 11, 73, 74, 122

Complaint, 96–98, 104–107, 112, 113, 123, 137 Consultant, 84, 107, 113, 114 Cope/coping, 4, 5, 18, 58, 75, 91, 92, 100, 101, 144, 160 Corporate, 2, 4, 19, 33, 49, 114, 122, 130 D Defense mechanism, 58, 72, 74, 75, 79, 80, 151 Depression, 9, 12, 13, 31, 84, 97, 101, 102, 105, 156, 160 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), 9, 14, 26 Distress, 12, 18, 98, 105, 106, 138–140 E Effectiveness, 32, 43, 46, 59, 154, 161 Emotional abuse, 97, 104, 145 Empathy, 11, 13, 14, 21, 27–29, 73, 74, 83, 93, 94, 102, 129, 133,

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018 M.-L. Germain, Narcissism at Work, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-60330-8

175

176  Index 136, 141–143, 147, 152, 154, 158, 163 F Financial cost, 102 G Goldwater Rule, 121 H Harassment, 5, 95, 104, 105, 109, 110, 112–114, 146 Healthcare, 107, 108, 171 Human cost, 41 Human resources, 58, 87, 92, 94, 95, 104–107, 146 I Inferiority, 26, 151 Interpersonal, 4, 10, 13, 18, 19, 26, 28, 29, 44–46, 139, 142, 162

Measure, 4, 29–32, 36, 46, 59, 94, 105, 141, 144 N Narcissism, 2–4, 14, 15, 17, 18, 26, 29–33, 42–46, 48, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59, 60, 71, 73, 84, 93, 103, 114, 148, 152, 153, 161, 162 Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), 29–31, 33, 153 P Palin, Sarah, 132–134 Parent, 11, 73, 148 Pathological, 13, 15, 27–29, 31, 133, 161 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), 99, 101–103 Psychometric test, 25 R Recruitment, 106, 161 Research, 2, 4, 12, 26, 30, 32, 35, 36, 42, 45, 47, 48, 55, 57, 58, 93, 97, 101, 110, 138, 141, 152– 154, 161, 162 Resigning, 92

L Law/legal, 31–33, 35, 58, 76, 104, 105, 109, 111, 113, 127, 145, 160 Leadership, 18, 25, 35, 42–46, 49, 50, 52, 54, 55, 57, 59, 60, 78, 92, 104, 140, 143, 152, 154, 161, 162 Loser/losing, 50, 76, 78, 79, 82, 129, 130, 132, 136, 139, 142, 147, 154, 162

S Self-perception, 100 Steve Jobs, 55, 135, 136, 141, 143, 148, 165 Stress, 98, 100, 101, 108, 123, 126 Symptom, 18, 99–103, 132, 156

M Manager, 6, 44, 45, 53, 54, 92, 101, 105–108, 112, 114, 135

T Team/teamwork, 52, 54, 78, 104, 132, 135, 136, 153, 154, 162

Index

Treatment, 12, 33, 57, 75, 99, 105–110, 140, 147, 148, 160 Trump, Donald, 77, 128–131, 143–145 Turnover, 5, 53, 54, 108, 163 V Victim, 5, 56, 57, 72, 74–77, 79, 82, 83, 90–92, 98, 99, 101–103, 105, 110, 144, 146, 147, 155, 156, 158

  177

W Win/winning, 51, 76, 77, 80, 129, 130, 133 Workplace, 2, 4, 5, 19, 26, 30, 32, 42, 48, 57, 78, 79, 88, 95–97, 101, 103, 106–110, 112, 160–162