When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences 9781800437678, 9781800437661, 9781800437685, 1800437676

Table of contents :
Half Title Page
Title Page
Copyright Page
Dedication
Contents
List of Tables and Figures
About the Editors
About the Contributors
List of Contributors
Acknowledgments
Introduction: Acknowledging, Deconstructing and Processing When Leadership Fails
Chapter 1: Monsters, Inc.: Toxic Leadership and Engagement
Introduction
Background: Toxic Leadership and Engagement
Toxic Leadership
Employee Engagement
Methods
Participant Selection
Subjectivities
Data Analysis
Results
Before and After
The Nightmare
The Pretender
The Runaround
Leadership Lessons
Conclusion
References
Chapter 2: Investing the Time to Lead Well
Introduction
Leaders Invest in Self Knowledge
Deconstructing with Theory
Emotional Intelligence.
Multi-dimensional Wellness.
Knowledge of Self.
Leaders Invest in Others and Understand Systems
Deconstructing from Theory
Systems and Organizational Politics.
Relational Aggression.
Relational Leadership.
Leaders Invest in Building Organizational Coalitions
Deconstructing from Theory
Appreciative Inquiry.
Personal Leadership Lesson.
Conclusion
References
Chapter 3: Front Porch Organizations, Back Door Employees: How Mentoring Mishaps Potentially Derail Next Generation Leaders
Introduction
Imonee Brinkley Story
Amanda Ticker Story
Communication Breakdowns
Recommendations for Organizations
Provide Opportunities for Intellectual Growth
Look for Personal Engagement Opportunities
Foster Opportunities for Proteges to Move the Organization’s “Needle”
Encourage Authentic and Unique Expression
Recognize Their Desire for a Happy Work-life Balance
Acknowledge Who They Are
Tell them to Take Suitcases to Their Dreams
Recommendations for Groups
Engage Peer Mentors Within the Organization
Institute Multi-tier Feedback from Company Leaders
Establish a Diversity Taskforce
Provide Funding for Professional Leadership Growth Opportunities
Conclusion
References
Chapter 4: Toxic Followership: Leader Deception and Breach of Trust
Introduction
The Challenge
Presentation Day
The Big Reveal
The Truth Exposed
Lesson #1: Leader Manipulation
Lesson #2: Followers Under the Influence
Lesson #3: Toxic Followership is Dangerous
Conclusion
References
Chapter 5: Death by Authoritative Leadership and Micro‐management
Introduction
A Little Background
A Personal Lesson in Leadership
Ethical Responsibility
Organizational Culture
Combining Transformational and Situational Leadership Styles
Authoritative Leadership
Micro‐Management
Conclusion
References
Chapter 6: Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned
Introduction
Contextual Background
Incidents Creating the Crisis
Incident One
Incident Two
Incident Three
Aftermath
Leadership Lessons Learned
Conclusion
References
Chapter 7: Ethics, Leadership and the Dreaded Performance Appraisal
Introduction
Background
Small College USA
Medium College USA
A Spectacle of Performance Appraisal Mistakes
Mistake #1: Lack of Objectivism
Mistake #2: Freshness
Mistake #3: Causal Attribution
Mistake #4: First Impression
What Ethical Leadership Teaches Us about Performance Apprais
Employees
Managers
Groups and Teams
Organizations
Conclusion
References
Chapter 8: Autocratic Leadership among Managers and Its Impact on Salespersons Behavior in India’s Pharmaceutical Industry
Introduction
Definition
Leadership Failure Factor
Background
Selling Orientation – Customer Orientation (SOCO)
Adaptive Selling
Unethical Selling
Individual Level
Group Level
Organization Level
Leadership Lesson
Conclusion
References
Chapter 9: Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment: The Importance of Leading Oneself
Introduction
Background
Leadership Challenge and Failure
Deconstruction of Experience and Leadership Lessons
Individual Level
Group Level
Organization Level
Conclusion
References
Chapter 10: Toxic Leadership: A Quick Erosion of Psychological Safety
Introduction
The Early Months
Erosion of Psychological Safety
The Last Week: Devastation
The Aftermath
Leadership Lessons
For the Individual
For Groups
For Organizations
Conclusion
References
Chapter 11: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: How a Narcissistic Leader Decimated a Faith-Based Nonprofit
Introduction
Recruitment Issues: The Perfect Storm
The Trajectory of Devon’s Governance
Initial Romance of Leadership
Faltering Romance
Final Destruction of the Romance
Analysis of the Toxic Triangle and the Faith Component
Destructive Leader
Susceptible Followers
Conducive Environment
Lessons Learned
Organizational Lessons
Group Lessons
Individual Lessons
Conclusion
References
Chapter 12: When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain
Introduction
The Organization
Organizational Growth
Lessons from the Case
Conclusion
References
Chapter 13:How to Destroy a Research & Development Group without Really Trying
Introduction
Background
The Story
Inflection Point
Interpretation and Implications
Conclusion
References
Chapter 14: When Leading the Team Goes Wrong
Introduction
Background
Timeline
What Lessons Did We Learn as Individuals?
What Lessons Can Others Learn From Our Experiences?
What Can the Organization Learn From Our Experiences?
Conclusion
References
Chapter 15: No Rest in the Restroom: Servant Leadership and Conflict in Products & Marketing
Introduction
The Story
Failures in Leadership
Individual Lessons
Not Being A Servant Leader in Trying to Understand What The Headof Products and Marketing Needed
The Confrontation
Conflict Escalation
Group Lessons
Conflict Styles of the Executive Team
Organizational Lessons
Conclusion
References
Chapter 16: The Demise of a Company: An Insider’s Personal and Scholarly Reflection
Introduction
My Story
In the Beginning: A Thriving Workplace
Combative Corporate Culture
Growth, Ambition, and Succession
Decisions and Disillusionment
Resignation, Road-Trip, and Collapse
Discussion: Leadership Lessons
Habits of Unsuccessful Leaders
Lesson #1: Unhealthy Values and Behaviors Lead to Organizational Failure
Lesson #2: Arrogance Leads to Dismissiveness and Unwarranted Risk-taking
Lesson #3: Entrepreneurial Founders’ Reluctance to Allow Succession Prevents Healthy Organizational Evolution
My Personal Lessons
Conclusion
References
Chapter 17: Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader
Introduction
Miriam’s Servant Leadership
The Transition from Servant Leadership to Authoritarian Leadership
Leadership Lessons
Conclusion
References
Appendix: Interview Protocol – Toxic Leadership Study
Reference
Index

Citation preview

When Leadership Fails

This page intentionally left blank

When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences

EDITED BY

LONNIE R. MORRIS, JR. The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, USA

WENDY M. EDMONDS Bowie State University, USA

United Kingdom – North America – Japan – India – Malaysia – China

Emerald Publishing Limited Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK First edition 2021 Copyright © 2021 Emerald Publishing Limited Reprints and permissions service Contact: [email protected] No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters’ suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-80043-767-8 (Print) ISBN: 978-1-80043-766-1 (Online) ISBN: 978-1-80043-768-5 (Epub)

We dedicate this book to every employee, manager, executive, consultant, p­ rofessor, and researcher striving to make work a better place. Your resilience inspires. Keep going. Work needs you. Leadership needs you.

This page intentionally left blank

Contents

List of Tables and Figures About the Editors About the Contributors

xi xiii xv

List of Contributors

xix

Acknowledgments

xxi

Introduction : Acknowledging, Deconstructing and Processing When Leadership Fails

1

Chapter 1  Monsters, Inc.: Toxic Leadership and Engagement Ngozi Igbokwe, Sarah Smith, Colton Hart, Elizabeth Hergert, Ellen Reter, Marguerite Wildermuth, Ryan Bouda, Tiffany Phillips and Cristina Wildermuth

3

Chapter 2  Investing the Time to Lead Well Maria Malayter

17

Chapter 3  Front Porch Organizations, Back Door Employees: How Mentoring Mishaps Potentially Derail Next Generation Leaders Shanita Baraka Akintonde

29

Chapter 4  Toxic Followership: Leader Deception and Breach of Trust Wendy M. Edmonds

41

Chapter 5  Death by Authoritative Leadership and Micro-management Jennifer Capler

49

viii   Contents

Chapter 6  Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned Cheryl Patton

59

Chapter 7  Ethics, Leadership and the Dreaded Performance Appraisal Lonnie R. Morris

71

Chapter 8  Autocratic Leadership among Managers and Its Impact on Salespersons Behavior in India’s Pharmaceutical Industry G. Arun and C. G. Manoj Krishnan

81

Chapter 9  Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment: The Importance of Leading Oneself Randal Joy Thompson

91

Chapter 10  Toxic Leadership: A Quick Erosion of Psychological Safety Carly Speranza

103

Chapter 11  A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: How a Narcissistic Leader Decimated a Faith-Based Nonprofit Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski 113 Chapter 12  When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain Terry Fernsler

127

Chapter 13  How to Destroy a Research & Development Group without Really Trying Jay L. Brand

139

Chapter 14  When Leading the Team Goes Wrong Dayne Hutchinson and Sholondo Campbell

147

Chapter 15  No Rest in the Restroom: Servant Leadership and Conflict in Products & Marketing Timothy Hough

157

Chapter 16  The Demise of a Company: An Insider’s Personal and Scholarly Reflection Dorianne Cotter-Lockard

167

Contents    ix

Chapter 17  Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader Terry Fernsler

179

Appendix: Interview Protocol – Toxic Leadership Study

191

Index

193

This page intentionally left blank

List of Tables and Figures

Tables Table 1a. Table 1b. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4.

Sample Demographics: Gender. Sample Demographics: Age. Toxic Leadership Themes. Roles of Key Individuals Involved in Project Implementation. Reasonable Cost Guidelines for Solicitation Activities.

7 7 8 94 184

Figure Fig. 1. The Toxic Triangle and Its Constituent Parts. Reprinted from Padilla et al. (2007, p. 180) with permission from Elsevier.

119

This page intentionally left blank

About the Editors

Lonnie R. Morris, Jr. is an Assistant Professor of Organizational Leadership at The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, USA. He studies leadership and ethics in work and learning environments. Wendy M. Edmonds is an Assistant Professor of Human Resource Development at Bowie State University, USA. Her research focuses on toxic followership.

This page intentionally left blank

About the Contributors

Dr. G. Arun is a Professor and Associate Director of Providence School of Business in India. He received his PhD in Management from SCSVMV University, India. He had authored two textbooks in Marketing and published many articles with national and international repute. He has 13 years of experience in industry, research, and teaching. Shanita Baraka Akintonde is an Associate Professor of Communication at Columbia College, USA. She is an author, podcast host, speaker, wife, and mother of two college students. She shares her leadership and diversity expertise through media, lectures, newspaper columns, blogs, and books. Her messages captivate audiences from Atlanta to South Africa. Ruth Beck works in the Intercultural Management (MA) degree program at Europäische Fernhochschule Hamburg. She is responsible for master level courses on intercultural negotiation and organizational sustainability and teaches intercultural management online. Ryan Bouda is a Founding Partner of LEAP Training & Coaching. He specializes in building leadership and creating culture that elevates communication, engagement, and innovation. He is a Certified Coach and Trainer in Conversational Intelligence® specializing in executive/leadership coaching, team building, culture change, and communication dynamics. Jay L. Brand is a Professor of Leadership, Higher Education & Organizational Studies at Andrews University. He obtained MA & PhD degrees in Experimental Psychology from University of Louisville, KY, USA, and was Chair, Psychology & Social Work, La Sierra University; Associate Professor of Psychology, Loma Linda University; and served in Ideation, an R&D team for a global enterprise. Sholondo Campbell, Ed.D., currently serves as the Director of Student Engagement and New Student Programs at Florida Southwestern State College, in Fort Myers. His research interests focus on organizational leadership and the evolution of student development theory to be inclusive of diverse and non-traditional student populations. Dr. Jennifer Capler is the Owner of The DM Woman, LLC, a Leadership Development Coach. She is a copy/ghost writer, published author, researcher, and speaker.

xvi    About the Contributors Her research focuses on emotional intelligence, effective decision-making, and political leadership. She loves adventure, adrenaline, great foods, and laughter. Dorianne Cotter-Lockard served as an Executive on a Fortune 100 Divisional C-level Leadership Team. She earned a PhD in Human and Organizational Systems, teaches leadership at Saybrook University, and conducts research on team collaboration, creativity at work, and leadership. Her publications include Authentic Leadership and Followership: International Perspectives. Leanne Dzubinski is an Associate Professor of Intercultural Education at Biola University. She teaches doctoral courses on education, leadership, and research methods. Her publications include studies of women in leadership, gender bias, women in Christian higher education, adult learning, online learning, qualitative research, and women in Christian history. Wendy M. Edmonds is an Assistant Professor of Human Resource Development at Bowie State University, USA. Her research focuses on toxic followership. Terry Fernsler, MNPL, PhD, has 38 years of diverse experience in the nonprofit sector. He is currently an Advisor and Instructor at James Madison University in the Nonprofit Studies minor program. He also teaches at the Bush School of Government and Policy’s Center for Nonprofits & Philanthropy at Texas A&M University. Colton Hart is a Psychology Professional acting as a sympathetic guide to help others navigate complex and challenging situations. He currently works as an Executive Office Team Leader at a national banking organization in Des Moines Iowa. He enjoys community service and aiding others in achieving their goals and full potential. Elizabeth Hergert is a Career Services Professional who has a passion for helping students. She works in the Liberal Arts and Sciences Career Services office at Iowa State University as a Career Adviser. Outside of school and work, she enjoys spending time with family and friends, traveling, reading, and baking. Tim Hough is the Founder and Principal of Perspective Management Consulting Group, an International Business Leader with over 30 years of experience leading technology-focused organizations, and a PhD student in Business Psychology at The Chicago School of Professional Psychology. He is best known for identifying new market potential and forging strong relationships. Dayne Hutchinson, PhD, works at Marymount Manhattan College, in New York City as the Assistant Dean for Student Affairs and Director of Student Development and Activities. His research interests Center on First Generation Afro-Caribbean immigrants, Afro-Caribbean identity development, and Afro-Caribbean experiences within higher education in the United States.

About the Contributors    xvii Ngozi Igbokwe is a Talent Development Professional, passionate about helping others learn and grow. She is also enthusiastic about diversity, equity, and inclusion. Currently, she serves as the Vice President of eMedia & Marketing with the ATD Central Iowa Chapter. She lives in Iowa, with her immediate family. Dr. C. G. Manoj Krishnan is an Associate Professor in Human Resources & Organizational Behavior at TKM Institute of Management in India and a leading management consultant and research guide. He has a distinguished record of publication in Scopus indexed and approved journals and has presented research papers at international and national conferences. Maria Malayter is an Associate Professor in Business Psychology at The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, MBA Professor at Concordia University Portland, and Author of four books. She is a Certified Wellness Practitioner (CWP) who has worked with worksite wellness and well-being centered leadership in various organizational settings. Lonnie R. Morris, Jr. is an Assistant Professor of Organizational Leadership at The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, USA. He studies leadership and ethics in work and learning environments. Cheryl Patton earned her PhD in Organizational Leadership at Eastern University where she currently serves as an Adjunct Faculty Member for the College of Business and Leadership. In addition to her role at Eastern University, she is employed at Northcentral University as a core part-time professor in its School of Business. Tiffany Phillips spent over 20 years as a Human Resource Professional, primarily in the manufacturing sector. She is a Human Resource Manager with a food processing company in the Des Moines, IA area. She enjoys studying at Drake University, cheering at her son’s sporting events and visiting family in Florida. Ellen Reter graduated from Drake University in 2020 with a bachelor’s degree in Biochemistry, Cell and Molecular Biology (BCMB) and Writing, and a minor in Biology. There, she worked as a writing tutor for three years and in a mammalian physiology surgical research project for one. She is currently pursuing her MD through the Rural Medical Education Program (RMED) at the University of Illinois in Rockford. Sarah Smith works as an Operational Risk Officer at a community bank. She is a Board Member for InfraGard Iowa Members Alliance, Iowa Contingency Planners, FBI Citizen’s Academy Alumni Association, and Norwalk Easter Public Library. She lives in Norwalk, IA with her husband and neurotic dog. Dr. Carly Speranza is a Director of Research and Assistant Professor of Management for the School of Business and Technology at Marymount University. She is also Adjunct Faculty at Creighton University and Indiana Tech. She has

xviii    About the Contributors retired from the U.S. Air Force in 2018 where she served on Active-Duty for over 20 years. Randal Joy Thompson, PhD, is a scholar-practitioner who has lived and worked globally in international development. She is currently a Fielding Graduate University Institute of Social Innovation Fellow. She Coedited Leadership and Power in International Development: Navigating the Intersections of Gender, Culture, Context, and Sustainability (2018); also Co-editing Reimagining Leadership on the Commons (2021); and has published book chapters on leadership and articles on women, evaluation, foreign aid, and education. Cristina Wildermuth, Ed.D. is an Associate Professor at Drake University, where she directs the Master of Science in Leadership Development and teaches courses in ethics, global leadership, and research. She is originally from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. She has traveled extensively conducting leadership development in Latin America, Europe, and the United States. Marguerite Wildermuth is a Senior Psychology Major at Drake University. She is involved in research in her department and hopes to become a Clinical Psychologist specializing in working with Deaf and Hard of Hearing children. When not working in her department, she enjoys volunteering and creative writing.

List of Contributors

Dr. G. Arun

Providence School of Business in India, India

Shanita Baraka Akintonde Communication at Columbia College, USA Ruth Beck

Europäische Fernhochschule Hamburg, Germany

Ryan Bouda

LEAP Training & Coaching, USA

Jay L. Brand

Andrews University, USA

Sholondo Campbell

Florida Southwestern State College, USA

Dr Jennifer Capler

The DM Woman, LLC, USA

Dorianne Cotter-Lockard

Saybrook University, USA

Leanne Dzubinski

Intercultural Education at Biola University, USA

Wendy M. Edmonds

Bowie State University, USA

Terry Fernsler

James Madison University, USA

Colton Hart

Des Moines Iowa, USA

Elizabeth Hergert

Recruiting Coordinator for Engineering Career Services at Iowa State University, USA

Tim Hough

Perspective Management Consulting Group, USA

Dayne Hutchinson

Marymount Manhattan College, USA

Ngozi Igbokwe

Des Moines, IA USA

Maria Malayter

The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, USA

Dr C. G. Manoj Krishnan

TKM Institute of Management, India

Lonnie R. Morris, Jr

The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, USA

Cheryl Patton

Eastern University, USA

Tiffany Phillips

Des Moines, USA

Ellen Reter

Drake University, USA

Sarah Smith

Des Moines, IA USA

xx    List of Contributors Dr. Carly Speranza

School of Business and Technology at Marymount University, USA

Randal Joy Thompson

Fielding Graduate University Institute for Social Innovation Fellow, USA

Cristina Wildermuth

Drake University, USA

Marguerite Wildermuth

Drake University, USA

Acknowledgments

We owe the utmost gratitude to a group of unsuspecting graduate students enrolled in HRD 732 at Bowie State University in spring 2019. We began a discussion with all of you about organizational behavior and ethics in the workplace that planted the seed for this book. Your willingness to engage in dialogue about experiences like the ones chronicled here proved this topic warranted greater attention. Your comments, reactions, and suggestions inspired us to invite a larger audience into the broader discourse.

This page intentionally left blank

Introduction: Acknowledging, Deconstructing and Processing When Leadership Fails When Leadership Fails describes an array of workplace experiences rooted in unconscionable practices ranging from ineffective to destructive leadership behaviors. In some experiences, employees are targeted with bullying, humiliation, manipulation, deception and harassment. Other experiences emanate from leader character flaws such as indifference, intemperance, envy and greed. Still others involve organizational sabotage in the form absenteeism, deception or stealing. This book grew from seeds planted in casual conversations about bad leadership experiences in professional practice, management consulting and executive coaching. Through sharing our own encounters, we recognized our narratives were not unique. We curated When Leadership Fails with three goals in mind. First, we give voice to the brave individuals willing to share their experiences. These encounters can have longstanding, adverse effects on personal well-being and career trajectories even as you move onto new supervisors, departments or organizations. You will better understand that impact as you reflect on the authors’ accounts and compare them to your own experiences. Second, we deconstruct these experiences to reclaim our power. Each chapter demonstrates how resilience and professional growth triumph in spite of unrelenting supervisors, dismayed peers and irresponsible organizations. Lastly, we want to inform better leadership and organization development practices through communal processing of these collective experiences. Hence, each chapter identifies leadership lessons for individuals, groups and organizational. We present the chapters as a continuum of experiences spanning the career lifecycle. Chapter 1 sets the foundation for our journey with a qualitative exploration of toxic leadership and employee engagement that leads to a three-part typology of toxic leadership behaviors. Chapters 2–4 critically examine early profession mishaps that prompt us to reconsider how emotional intelligence, mentorship and followership contribute to When Leadership Fails experiences. Chapters 5–9 move into middle management calamities. Micromanagement, unethical behavior and hostile work environments lead to self-betrayal and organizational crisis. The remaining chapters, 10–17, chronicle executive leader disasters in

When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 1–2 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211020

2   Introduction which narcissism, power, conflict and arrogance threaten psychological safety, organizational culture, and succession. These stories are the reasons we study organizational leadership in the first place. This book examines what happens When Leadership Fails across a myriad of contexts including consulting, research & development, sales, health care, federal service, higher education, the military, nonprofits and faith-based organizations. These experiences span the gamut of industries, occupations, sectors and professional tenure. Through these chapters we understand how widespread these experience plague our workplaces. We implore you to use this book as a tool for catharsis, learning and development. The reality is clear. When leadership fails, we all fail.

Chapter 1

Monsters, Inc.: Toxic Leadership and Engagement Ngozi Igbokwe, Sarah Smith, Colton Hart, Elizabeth Hergert, Ellen Reter, Marguerite Wildermuth, Ryan Bouda, Tiffany Phillips and Cristina Wildermuth Abstract Leaders have a profound impact on the work lives of the employees they supervise. This chapter explores the experiences of employees whose leaders exhibit toxic behaviors and the impact of this toxicity on employee engagement. The authors report the findings of a qualitative study involving in-depth interviews with 13 participants. First, the authors describe the participants’ experiences before and after experiencing toxicity. Next, the authors outline three critical toxic leadership styles: the nightmare (leaders who have unbalanced emotional control and who are overly fond of power), the pretender (leaders whose authenticity and integrity seem low, who play different characters depending on the circumstances), and the runaround (leaders who change directions too often or give unclear instructions). Finally, the authors address organizational, leadership, and individual strategies to identify and remove toxic leaders from the workplace. Keywords: Employee engagement; leadership effectiveness; psychological safety; supervisor–employee relations; toxic leadership; employee meaningfulness

Introduction Have you ever had a boss who became the reason you never wanted to step foot in a workplace again? Well, you are not alone. Most of us have worked for an inadequate supervisor who made us feel resentful, angry, or apathetic. At first, we may have been willing to give a new manager a break. Maybe the person did When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 3–15 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211001

4    Ngozi Igbokwe et al. not know the ropes yet. Maybe we were the ones doing something wrong. After a while, however, we started losing energy, experiencing less focus, and bringing less passion to work. We had lost our engagement. Engagement refers to “a positive work-related state of fulfillment that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli et al., 2006, p. 702). Vigor means energy; engaged employees with vigor are unlikely to feel exhausted at the end of a normal workday. Dedication involves employees’ passion and enthusiasm for what they do. Finally, absorption is linked to focus: the ability to concentrate on work’s responsibilities. Engagement benefits organizations and employees. Engaged organizations report positive work outcomes such as higher customer loyalty, increased productivity, and lower absenteeism (Harter et al., 2016). Engaged employees find meaning in what they do and feel supported by the organization (Vila-Vázquez et al., 2018). They experience higher life satisfaction and better mental and physical health than their disengaged counterparts (Guglielmi et al., 2016). Researchers have identified relationships between engagement and leadership. For example, the Gallup report The State of the American Manager (2015) connected 70% of the employees’ variability in engagement to their managers’ actions. The common adage “people do not leave organizations, they leave managers” is grounded in data: one in two employees leave organizations throughout their careers because of their managers (Gallup, 2015). In this chapter, we share the results of a qualitative study exploring the relationship between toxic leadership behaviors and employee engagement. We asked two central questions: 1. How does a manager’s behavior sustain or hinder employees’ willingness to bring their whole selves to work? 2. What is the impact of managers’ behaviors on employees and their engagement? This chapter also includes: (a) background information on toxic leadership and engagement; (b) research methods; (c) our findings; and (d) leadership lessons.

Background: Toxic Leadership and Engagement Toxic Leadership Lipman-Blumen (2006) defined toxic leaders as those who “leave their followers worse off than they found them” (p. 3). Whether intentionally or unintentionally, toxic leaders intimidate, belittle, and deceive their followers. They also can engage in self-promotion, abuse, lack of self-control, unpredictability, narcissism, and authoritarianism (Schmidt, 2014). These leaders’ destructive styles evolve, causing unaddressed toxic behaviors to fester and leading to unnecessary employee suffering (Mehta & Maheshwari, 2014). One would think such harmful leaders would be identified and removed. However, toxic leaders remain all around us. Theo Veldsman (2014), a professor at the University of Johannesburg, argues three out of every 10 leaders are toxic. Some organizations experience more toxic leaders than others. For example, in a study

Monsters, Inc.    5 on toxic leadership behaviors at the Army War College conducted by Reed and Bullis (2009), all respondents experienced toxic leadership. Toxic leaders’ actions affect their followers, who may feel demoralized and marginalized (Green, 2014). Various authors have tied poor leadership to the disengagement of their followers (Beck & Harter, 2014; Leary et al., 2013; Payne et al., 1998; Schmidt, 2008). However, toxic leaders may be difficult to identify, as one follower’s “toxic leader” may be another person’s hero (Lipman-Blumen, 2006). Even world leaders who committed major atrocities had adoring followers. Lipman-Blumen (2005) identified six reasons followers support toxic leaders. These are (a) having someone in a position of authority; (b) experiencing safety and security; (c) feeling special; (d) belonging to a community; (e) avoiding isolation; and (f) feeling powerless to confront the toxic leader.

Employee Engagement Unhealthy leaders damage the work environment. Currently, a mere 30% of the working population experience engagement (Gallup, 2015). Disengagement has led to a general decrease in productivity and an estimated loss of hundreds of billions of dollars a year in the US alone. The phenomenon, therefore, has practical implications for companies and affects revenue. Leaders’ efforts to understand and foster engagement could promote workers’ satisfaction, happiness, and feelings of connection to their work (Schmidt, 2014) and the organization (Saks, 2006). Three conditions promote engagement within the workplace: meaningfulness, safety, and availability of resources. Employees experiencing meaningfulness feel valued by and valuable to their community (Macey & Schneider, 2008). Kahn (1990) connected meaningfulness to task characteristics, role characteristics, and the quality of the work interactions. Meaningful tasks are challenging and rewarding. Employees gain a sense of ownership, the motivation to work toward their goals, and the opportunity to exercise variety and creativity. Meaningful roles give people a sense of importance and purpose. Finally, meaningful work interactions help employees build positive connections in the workplace. Employees may embrace coworkers as a second family (McBride & Bergen, 2015). Safety involves “feeling able to show and employ one’s self without fear of negative consequences to self-image, status, or career” (Kahn, 1990, p. 708). Safety refers to employees’ perceptions of how much risk they can take and the impact of taking such risks (Frazier et al., 2017). Four factors influence safety: interpersonal relationships, group and intergroup dynamics, management style and process, and organizational norms. ⦁⦁ Interpersonal relationships: Employees feel safer when they can be vulnerable at

work and when workplace interpersonal relationships are positive (Kahn, 1990).

⦁⦁ Intergroup dynamics: Healthy groups provide protection (and thus, feelings of

safety) to its members, increasing morale and rapport (Salanova et al., 2005).

⦁⦁ Management: Employees feel safer when managers are supportive and

empowering. Engaging managers accept occasional failure without negative consequences (Kahn, 1990). A recent meta-analysis on safety confirmed the

6    Ngozi Igbokwe et al. relationships between positive interactions with the manager and the employee’s feelings of safety (Frazier et al., 2017) ⦁⦁ Organizational norms: Employees appreciate clarity, predictability, and stability in organizational rules and norms (Kahn, 1990). Finally, availability means the compatibility between the employees’ physical, emotional, and psychological resources and the work demands. When resources are scarce, the employees may lose focus and engagement. Identifying the cause of disengagement is not always simple. The confusion between engagement traits (personality traits connected to the phenomenon), attitudes (feelings of energy, satisfaction, involvement, empowerment, and commitment), and behaviors (going above and beyond one’s duty, expanding one’s role, collaborating with colleagues, etc.) hinders engagement research (Macey & Schneider, 2008). Further, the search for an “engaged person” is elusive. Even though personality traits such as extraversion, neuroticism, and conscientiousness correlate with engagement, the correlation values are weak (Wildermuth, 2010). Employees may experience engaged attitudes and demonstrate engaged behaviors despite their personality traits. Therefore, the question becomes not who engages, but under what work conditions most employees – regardless of their personalities – engage. Leaders significantly influence employees’ work conditions. A leader can contribute to the design of meaningful work, foster a safe environment, and ensure employees have work-related tools and resources. While exceptional employees might experience engagement regardless of the leader, toxic leaders are unlikely to foster an engaging environment and might instead destroy existing engaged relationships. Therefore, individuals at all levels must understand how to identify toxicity and prevent its development in the workplace.

Methods Participant Selection Our study followed a general qualitative design. We recruited a convenience sample of volunteer participants (n = 13): eight males and five females. The average reported age was 39.5 (Tables 1a and 1b). After asking each participant to complete an informed consent form, we collected data through in-depth interviews. We analyzed the data qualitatively, seeking representative codes and themes to summarize the data. Our interview protocol is available at https://tinyurl.com/toxicleadershipstudy. To protect participant confidentiality, we asked each participant to select a pseudonym. Further, we removed all identifiable information from the transcripts and deleted all audio recordings after the transcription process.

Subjectivities We recognized two primary sources of bias. First, we may have considered our own encounters with toxic leaders as we coded and analyzed the data. Second,

Monsters, Inc.    7 Table 1a. Sample Demographics: Gender. Gender Males

Females

Preferred Not to Answer

5

3

5 Table 1b. Sample Demographics: Age.

Age Meana 39.5

SD 12.91

a

The average age was based on 11 out of 13 participants. Two participants preferred not to report their age.

we reviewed the literature on toxic leadership and engagement prior to running the interviews and wrote the interview questions based on Schmidt’s (2008) toxic leadership model. Our questions may have biased the participants’ responses. To control for these subjectivities we paid close attention to responses which did not align with our expectations (Maxwell, 2012).

Data Analysis Four coders analyzed the data. First, each coder reviewed the excerpts to compile a preliminary list of codes. We then met to reconcile the codes and identify common themes. Using Dedoose (an online qualitative data analysis software), one coder generated an interreliability test to calculate Cohen’s kappa scores for each pair of raters. These scores measure rater agreement, with a maximum consistency of κ = 1. The lowest kappa between our raters was 0.49 and the highest was 0.78. After thoroughly discussing the excerpts and reconciling any disagreements we were ready to report the findings.

Results Our results support connections between toxic leadership behaviors and feelings of disengagement. Participants experienced a “honeymoon period” in which employees gave the leader additional time to adjust to an unfamiliar environment. As the leader’s toxic behaviors continued, however, and the detrimental leadership styles became clear, participants reported feelings of frustration, disorientation, and stress. The first theme, “Before and After,” has to do with the participants’ transition from engagement to disengagement. The three remaining themes – “The Nightmare,” “The Pretender,” and “The Runaround” – describe the participants’ perceptions of leadership toxicity (Table 2).

8    Ngozi Igbokwe et al. Table 2. Toxic Leadership Themes. Theme

Description

The Experience Before and after

How the employee felt when first starting the job (or relationship with the new leader) and how those feelings changed as a result of the leader’s actions

The Leader The Nightmare

Nightmares had difficulty managing emotions and berated employees in public. These leaders tended to focus on their own goals and needs

The Pretender

Pretenders overly delegated, making the employees responsible for the leader’s duties. The theme also includes unethical behaviors such as playing favorites, acting dishonestly, and behaving differently “behind closed doors” and “in public.”

The Runaround

Runaround leaders had unclear expectations and directions. They seemed unpredictable, changed their minds excessively, and had unrealistic expectations.

Before and After This theme included participants’ perceptions of the impact the leaders’ toxic behaviors had on worker engagement. Participants’ engagement did not decrease right away. Even as the leader’s toxic behaviors became apparent, participants seemed ready to dismiss inappropriate behaviors or attribute these to managerial inexperience. The following quotes represent participants’ willingness to forgive when they first met the new leader. ⦁⦁ “At first, I was very engaged and collaborated well with my boss and had some

goals that were definitely the same, as far as what we saw in the years ahead. So that part was exciting.” ⦁⦁ “The first year that the boss was new … I think people were forgiving about a lot of things that happened and were willing to give this person a chance.”

However, as the leader’s negative behaviors persisted and intensified, employees’ workload and emotional distress increased, leading to a decline in morale and engagement. Some participants began to restrict their work hours or minimize interactions with the leader. Others became increasingly frustrated with the effect their leader’s actions had on the work team. ⦁⦁ “You were stuck in the middle and the work environment, the climate, the

whole group just gradually, over time, just dwindled.”

⦁⦁ “People became very frustrated, a lot of the joy was just stuffed out of it and

you were still trying to do the best you could because, for the people in the

Monsters, Inc.    9 program that you were working with because you wanted, you have their best interests at heart.” In summary, participants did not disengage from the start. Employees forgave the leader’s behaviors during the initial honeymoon period. Gradually, however, the leader’s toxicity took its toll, decreasing employees’ feelings of energy, enthusiasm, and safety.

The Nightmare Nightmare leaders made one or more of the following critical mistakes. First, they seemed unable to manage their emotional expression according to the social situation. Second, they were too eager to display power, separating themselves from their followers. Third, they took credit for team members’ ideas, failing to acknowledge employees for a job well done. Finally, nightmare leaders had an authoritarian and controlling style, denying employees the autonomy needed for meaningful work experience. While quick to criticize employees, leaders with low emotional understanding seemed unable to provide recognition or acknowledgment. ⦁⦁ “We were trying to do many good things and he would always come at us

negatively and never want to build us up. An atta-boy would have been good in there, to help build morale where it was needed. He was just negative all the time, and it wears on you after a while.”

The hot-tempered leaders who could not control their emotions were easily angered. They demeaned and berated their employees, often in public, when anything went wrong. The following are representative comments: ⦁⦁ “Verbally, he was always putting everyone down including me. His ego was

big, meaning no one could do right by him, and even if you did a good thing, he would treat you like garbage beneath his feet. The impact was negative and made me feel, why [should I] work here?” ⦁⦁ “He was really hot-headed. He was quick to fire somebody if they made a mistake and quick to judge somebody based on a mistake. He rarely gave people second chances. If you made one wrong step, you’re on his bad side for good then and that’s just kind of it for you. It was hard to work in that kind of toxic environment.” Leaders who lacked social/emotional awareness and berated others in front of employees also undermined the work environment: ⦁⦁ “I didn’t have any direct experience with a manager being abusive, but I wit-

nessed it happening to other coworkers where they were degraded in front of other colleagues openly instead of in a private setting. And sometimes it wasn’t warranted at all. And the manner that it was given, it just was not appropriate or professional.”

10    Ngozi Igbokwe et al. This inability to predict or control the leaders’ personal emotions affected not only the work environment but also the employees’ effectiveness. ⦁⦁ “If something wasn’t going his way or someone had an idea he didn’t like, it

would be a really quick response of either ‘f*** that’ or ‘f*** them.’ It didn’t lead to any type of resolution when the first immediate response from him was, ‘no, f*** that.’ It made us limited with different ways in how we could help the customers.”

On the other end of the nightmare’s spectrum of socially inappropriate emoting was the emotionally over-regulated leader. This person appeared cold and almost robotic. As a result, employees experienced a lack of emotional connection and wondered whether the person even wanted to be a leader at all. ⦁⦁ “He was great at controlling his emotions. He always had kind of a little smile

on his face, never raised his voice, never lowered his voice, never squeaked. He was just very calm, almost looked like a robot most of the time. But behind there you get the feeling that he didn’t like the fact that he wasn’t leading the charge. He wasn’t totally in charge.”

This quote brings us to the second component of the nightmare style: a hunger for power. Some nightmares tried to boost their own power and social standing by keeping their distance from employees. ⦁⦁ “When he came into the room, expect everything to stop, even if it was patient

care, to acknowledge his presence and his interest. That’s all I can comment about that. It drove me nuts. I hated that.”

Other nightmare leaders’ need to promote their power and social standing led them to take credit for others’ work and ideas. One participant explained: ⦁⦁ “Some would engage in self-promotion by basically taking your work product

if you’ve got the right answer and then claiming it as their own, which was very frustrating.”

Finally, participants told stories of authoritarian nightmare leaders who failed to involve their employees in critical work decisions. One participant recalled a leader who felt “everything he said and every decision he made needed to be followed.” Another respondent described a leader who seldom took part in the discussions but “when he showed up, he expected everyone to just listen to what he had to say and take that as like the Gospel and, and do what he asked.” Nightmare leaders’ employees felt distant, isolated, and disengaged. The employees tried to avoid the leaders and were constantly in a state of fear. One participant summarized the consequences of the nightmare style:

Monsters, Inc.    11 ⦁⦁ “You have no motivation to get up and go to work in the morning and go

above and beyond. For example, trying to think of new processes or create new efficiencies because you’re really just focused on getting through the day, and not having him yell at you. It’s hard to be engaged when you have someone who is tempered and you’re not quite sure where his temper is going to be day to day.”

The Pretender Pretender leaders combined a laissez-faire and absent style with inauthentic and even unethical behaviors. They acted differently “behind closed doors” and in public, leaving employees confused and mistrustful. Laissez-faire leaders neglected their responsibilities. Their offices were constantly vacant and employees were left to their own devices. These leaders abandoned their duties and expected employees to do extra work. One employee recalled her experiences taking over the work of her boss: ⦁⦁ “I was given more responsibilities that were actually the boss’s responsibilities …

because they weren’t good at doing it. They weren’t very organized, and they were more of a big thinker than a detail orientated person. And so, a lot of that got shifted to me, which wasn’t even my job description at all. So, I was trying to do my normal job as well as keep the ball on the line as far as what they should be doing, what they needed to do, almost like a secretary type of thing.”

Pretender leaders were not only absent or inefficient – they were also untrustworthy. A lack of trust in the leader’s actions prevented participants from asking for the help they needed to complete their responsibilities. For example, one employee felt the leader could not keep important topics confidential: ⦁⦁ “You just had no trust in your boss at all. So … you would never go to them

and share those concerns because you never knew who that person, you know, it wouldn’t be in confidence in who they were going to tell. So, you didn’t have anyone to share that with really when you did have concerns.”

Employees saw pretenders as dishonest, inauthentic, and engaging in window dressing actions that were just for show. One participant explained the leader “would act one way in front of people and then [she] would hear about different things behind closed doors.” Other leaders acted in unethical ways involving scapegoating, favoritism, and deception. ⦁⦁ “He was able to just make it sure it was someone else’s fault. It was never his

fault. He never had anything bad happen. So, he was the Teflon man.”

⦁⦁ “I felt like my manager, she definitely promoted those who were closest to her.

She definitely had her favorites and there was a lot of favoritism going on in the department.”

12    Ngozi Igbokwe et al. ⦁⦁ “I knew for a fact that he was doing some unethical things with a company.

He wasn’t properly paying every employee like he should. So, there were some unethical things behind it and some issues that I knew about because I was a manager. If you can’t trust a manager, you’re always looking behind your back, saying ‘What’s going on? What’s happening?’ or ‘What’s he doing?’ ”

In summary, pretenders’ two facedness and unreliability left their employees feeling overburdened, distrustful, and on edge.

The Runaround The Runaround theme combines unclear and unreasonable expectations with unpredictability and poor direction. Employees were not sure of what the leader wanted, and the leader offered no support. When the results were poor, the leader became unhappy and more volatile, and the employees felt disoriented and disengaged. ⦁⦁ “He came over to us and instead of taking on and thinking about [the prob-

lem] and problem-solving … he just dumped it on our team and then said, ‘Figure this out by the end of the week. See you later.’ And he left. I mean, there’s no engagement there. He didn’t even [talk] to the team, he talked to the leader of six different teams and [said] that she just had to come tell us because he was in too much of a hurry to explain to us what he needed.”

Runaround leaders committed to goals without their followers’ input or changed a standard after previously agreeing to a different one. These leaders often failed to show investment in the process, focusing only on the end goal. Further, they failed to secure their followers’ buy-in to the goal. One participant shared his experience with a leader who disregarded goals decided by the group: ⦁⦁ “You committed to goals as a group. You knew what you’re going to do. And

then he’d go back and then he would recommit to a different goal at a shorter timeline and not listen to what we had to say and why we weren’t going to meet that timeline.”

Participants who experienced runaround leadership reported disengagement with the work and with the leader. Some ignored the leader or questioned their authority, feeling unable to commit to the goal the leader set. Here is how a participant described their frustration: ⦁⦁ “Eventually you just got frustrated with it. You got disengaged and frustrated

because no matter what we said, or no matter what we did or how we’ve improved, we couldn’t do something. Whether it was ‘You need to load these billion skew numbers in the system by Friday.’ And we’re like, ‘We can’t. We can load 250,000 a day and we have five days till Friday. Like, 250,000 times five is 1.25 million – like bro, we’re like 999 million short of what you want.’ And [he] was just like, ‘well figure it out.’ Okay, well system’s gonna break, nothing’s gonna work. And that’s what happened.”

Monsters, Inc.    13

Leadership Lessons We may conclude these stories of volatile, angry, unethical, and incompetent leaders do not apply to us. Toxic leaders, however, do not exist in a vacuum. Followers keep quiet, mistakenly believing the problem will just go away. The leaders’ peers ignore obvious symptoms of toxicity. The leaders’ direct managers fail to correct the problem. Any of us may have ‘toxic moments’ – situations in which, under stress, we lose control of our emotions, ignore our team’s need to take part in decisions, micromanage others, or change directions too quickly. Unintentionally and blindly, we could be toxic. Thus, our study has general implications for organizations, leaders, and followers. Organizations must ask themselves whether their culture allows toxicity to flourish. Someone hired and promoted that leader. Someone ignored the leader’s outbursts or was too scared to disclose them. Someone failed to ask employees for their input. Further, certain organizations have a higher percentage of toxic leaders (Reed & Bullis, 2009). Also, organizational cultures can allow toxic masculinity and excessive competition to flourish (Matos, O’Neil, & Lei, 2018). One recommendation is to add 360 assessments to evaluation processes, ensuring employees have a voice. Employees might also take part in hiring and recruitment committees, providing input when a leader is selected. Leaders must build systems and cultures that value honest feedback. Followers may help leaders correct blind spots, but only if processes and systems are in place to facilitate honest follower–leader conversations. A solution is to encourage followers to provide feedback anonymously. For example, employees who take part in 360 assessments tend to find them helpful (Reed & Bullis, 2009). Anonymous feedback to leaders, however, only solves part of the problem. Employees are more likely to speak up in a culture characterized by psychological safety (Nembhard & Edmondson, 2011) and positive employee–leader relationships (Frazier, Fainshmidt, Klinger, Pezeshkan, & Vracheva, 2017). In summary, leaders can cultivate self-awareness in the short term by receiving and learning from anonymous 360 evaluations and in the long term by creating a safe work environment in which followers are encouraged to give feedback. Finally, followers may believe sharing feedback with their leaders is not “their job.” They may keep silent and hope someone else will notice the problem. Followers, however, are in the best position to witness the leader’s toxicity. As Steele (2011) notes, keeping quiet means supporting the toxic leader. Keeping good notes of the leader’s successes and failures, effective and ineffective moments, may facilitate the feedback process.

Conclusion Disengagement costs US organizations an alarming $450 billion to $550 billion per year (Sorenson & Garman, 2013). Leadership toxicity, therefore, is both expensive to the organization and exhausting to the employees. Those employees never forget their painful experiences with nightmare, pretender, and runaround

14    Ngozi Igbokwe et al. leaders – some participants recalled their toxicity encounters with vivid detail, even after years of experience and professional success. Participants in our study reported experiencing a honeymoon period, in which toxic leaders’ actions were tolerated. Perhaps this honeymoon should be shortlived. Early action might prevent an escalation of toxicity, the separation between the leader and the followers, and a decrease in productivity and quality. After all, frustrated employees who work in a toxic environment start loathing the very person whose help they need the most. Organizations, leaders, and followers share the responsibility to protect employee engagement and reject toxic leadership behaviors. Perhaps the best way to avoid “monster” leaders is to intentionally, quickly, and collectively stunt their growth.

References Beck, R., & Harter, J. (2014, March 13). Why good managers are so rare. Harvard Business Review – Managing People. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/03/why-good-­ managers-are-so-rare Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017). Psychological safety: A meta-analytic review and extension. Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 113–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12183 Gallup. (2015). The state of the American Manager. Retrieved from https://www.gallup. com/services/182138/state-american-manager.aspx Green, J. (2014). Toxic leadership in educational organizations. Education Leadership Review, 15(1), 18–33. Guglielmi, D., Avanzi, L., Chiesa, R., Mariani, M. G., Bruni, I., & Depolo, M. (2016). Positive aging in demanding workplaces: The gain cycle between job satisfaction and work engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1224. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2016.01224 Harter, J., Schmidt, F., Agrawal, S., Plowman, S., & Blue, A. (2016). Gallup Q12® metaanalysis report. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/reports/191489/q12-metaanalysis-report-2016.aspx Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.2307/256287 Leary, T. G., Green, R., Denson, K., Schoenfeld, G., Henley, T., & Langford, H. (2013). The relationship among dysfunctional leadership dispositions, employee engagement, job satisfaction, and burnout. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 16(2), 112–130. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0094961 Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). Toxic leadership: When grand illusions masquerade as noble visions. Leader to Leader, 2005(36), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.125 Lipman-Blumen, J. (2006). The allure of toxic leaders: Why we follow destructive bosses and corrupt politicians – and how we can survive them. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.x Matos, K., O’Neill, O. (M.), & Lei, X. (2018). Toxic leadership and the masculinity contest culture: How “win or die” cultures breed abusive leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 74(3), 500–528. doi:10.1111/josi.12284 Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Monsters, Inc.    15 McBride, M. C., & Bergen, K. M. (2015). Work spouses: Defining and understanding a “new” relationship. Communication Studies, 66(5), 487–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10510974.2015.1029640 Mehta, S., & Maheshwari, G. C. (2014). Toxic leadership: Tracing the destructive trail. International Journal of Management, 5(10), 18–24. Nembhard, I., & Edmondson, A. (2011). Psychological safety: A foundation for speaking up, collaboration, and experimentation in organizations. In G. M. Spreitzer & K. S. Cameron (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (pp. 490–506). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Payne, K., Cangemi, J., Fuqua, H., & Muhleakamp, R. (1997). Leadership and employee empowerment: The foundation for organizational success and profit in the twentyfirst century. Leadership Behavior, 119–130. Reed, G., & Bullis, R. (2009). The impact of destructive leadership on senior military officers and civilian employees. Armed Forces & Society, 36(1), 5–18. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0095327X09334994 Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169 Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiro, J. (2005). Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: The mediation of service climate. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217–1227. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217 Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471 Schmidt, A. (2008). Development and validation of the toxic leadership scale. Master’s thesis, University of Maryland. DRUM. Retrieved from http://drum.lib.umd.edu/­ handle/1903/8176 Schmidt, A. (2014). An examination of toxic leadership, job outcomes, and the impact of military deployment. Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland. DRUM. Retrieved from http://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/15250 Sorenson, S., & Garman, K. (2013, June 11). How to tackle U.S. employees’ s­tagnating engagement. Gallup. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/business­ journal/ 162953/tackle-employees-stagnating-engagement.aspx Steele, J. P. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of toxic leadership in the U.S. Army: A two year review and recommended solutions. Center for Army Leadership, June, 1–37. Veldsman, T. (2014). The growing cancer endangering organisations: Toxicity. The Human Capital Review. Retrieved from http://www.humancapitalreview.org/content/default. asp?Article_ID=1338 Vila-Vázquez, G., Castro-Casal, C., Álvarez-Pérez, D., & Del Río-Araújo, L. (2018). Promoting the sustainability of organizations: Contribution of transformational leadership to job engagement. Sustainability, 10(11), 4109. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su10114109 Wildermuth, C. (2010). The personal side of engagement: The influence of personality factors. In S. Albrecht (Ed.), Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research and practice (pp. 197–208). London: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 2

Investing the Time to Lead Well Maria Malayter Abstract Impactful leadership requires an investment in the self and others. Blinded by past success, this leader’s story explains examples of a failed attempt to learn how to navigate a new industry culture with hidden political landmines in the organization, communicate effectively in a hierarchy, and ultimately realize she might not have been a fit for the organization. This chapter will provide examples of the leader’s story of challenging organizational politics and relational aggression in the workplace. Through many conflicts and barriers to effective leadership, this chapter provides key insights of leadership self-awareness, wellness, communication blind spots, and organizational strategies to build trusting leader–follower relationships. Living in a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world today, the ability to build strong trusting relationships between leaders and followers and peers is vital to success as a leader and organization. The leader must learn from failure and innovate from lessons learned. To lead within a VUCA world, the time to invest in continuous leadership development is strongly recommended. Keywords: Appreciative inquiry; emotional intelligence; organizational politics; relational aggression; relational leadership; LMX; wellness

Introduction This chapter will recount the tragic leadership experience resulting in termination from the organization. It begins with a newly minted PhD, woman and aged 35, accepting the role of a university assistant dean, who moved forward aggressively to tackle organizational problems which required greater political skill than this leader had developed. The story begins with the leader finding road blocks When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 17–27 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211002

18    Maria Malayter in conflicts with peers who resented the leader’s promotion and who filed HR complaints against the leader within her first few months. HR noted her personnel record with her 1st employee communication problem. The improvement of adult student retention project was well above the new assistant dean’s experience. Yet, she found herself striving to make a difference without necessarily considering the leadership hierarchy, organizational dynamics, and change processes. She pushed forward her ideas and found resistance as she continued to move forward with her blind spots. She did not take the time to invest in learning deeply about the organization to be the best leader. This stress had a major impact on her health and relationships outside of the organization. The retention project continued and the assistant dean continued to have conflicts and found great resistance to her projects. The President, VP of HR and legal counsel had requested an emergency meeting with the assistant dean and HR noted a 2nd communication problem in the assistant dean’s personnel record. The assistant dean resigned from the role and collaborated with her dean to create a new center director role. The stress was creating health problems. A week later she was in the hospital with a significant heart issue. Upon returning to work after a medical leave, she continued the new director role. The new director, former assistant dean, oversaw an academic center that brought in revenue from grants and large organizational funders. When she caught an error in the funding, the accounting issue was resolved. A follow up meeting was called with the VP of HR and legal counsel to let her know she had damaged the university image. HR noted her personnel record with the 3rd  employee communication problem. She was then fired for insubordination for contacting the funder. The chapter will fully define the story in detail and then will deconstruct the leadership learning lessons of self-awareness, political skills, and planning for change. The sections of the chapter will include theoretical leadership lessons focusing on self, group, and the organization. Each section will outline the practical situation and align it with leadership lessons and theory.

Leaders Invest in Self Knowledge The self-awareness segment will discuss what leaders need to know about themselves through assessments of their own leadership styles. The theories discussed will focus on emotional intelligence (EI), wellness, and personality preferences. The importance of self-awareness will also discuss the need for outside professional colleagues and mentors for personal leadership development. The leader of this story, new PhD and assistant dean, was full of vision and the goal to become a college president through hard work and achievement. The leader persisted with her goals with great lack of awareness of self and others. This meant leaving for work at 6 a.m. and returning home at 8 p.m. leaving little time for rest, recuperation, and life outside work. She misperceived that her new PhD and promotion gave her the power to push change. She spoke more than she listened. The assistant dean persisted in her climbing to the top without awareness of others, respect for titles, job roles, and rank and organizational processes.

Investing the Time to Lead Well    19 She was unaware of how inauthentic she was in treating others until she was given an assignment in one of her leadership development classes. The assignment was to interview people about her leadership style. She needed people to be brutally honest with her. The assistant dean approached a colleague in IT who shared the following quote, “I know you better than others. Yet, you need to know the word on the street is. You only talk to people when you need something from them.” While the perception of the inauthenticity and using people was already created, the assistant dean learned she needed to change her ways.

Deconstructing with Theory The leading of the self is an important aspect of being an effective leader. When a leader does not take the time to explore their own strengths, work style, and personality preferences, it can lead to failure. Therefore, learning more about the self through several perspectives can provide a more holistic understanding to help us better work with others. This section will focus on a few different ways to explore the self, such as EI, wellness, and personality preferences. Emotional Intelligence.  While the leader in this story had great aspiration she had displayed a lack of self-awareness that is a critical skill for leaders of today. The assistant dean was full of energy and ready to achieve her goals; she needed to explore the concept of EI in greater depth. The research on EI became more prevalent in the leadership literature when Daniel Goleman (1995) presented the concept as a means for more career success. There are several dimensions of EI to understand in order to impact one’s leadership. First, there is self-awareness learning about oneself. The assistant dean appeared to be filled with a slight bit of arrogance in achieving her role at the age of 35. She did not self-monitor her enthusiasm for change and action related to the rest of the coworkers and leaders in other departments. Second, self-management where one takes responsibility for their interactions and behaviors. The assistant dean needed to become more aware of the new boundaries that were created when she was promoted and she could no longer discuss topics with her faculty peers like the past. If she had been better at self-management, she would have avoided the very first communication HR issue where she was accused of gossiping about firing the administrative assistants. Third, social awareness when an individual is observant and speak appropriately in the given situation. This includes empathy which is described as the ability to observe and take perspective of another person’s feelings expressed in communication. The assistant dean was very committed to looking organized and prepared for meetings yet often did not poll to the room of the participants to check in on their well-being. It appeared like she did not care about them and only cared about achieving her goal. The assistant dean would have been more successful in her communications if she would consider everyone’s feelings and perspective and not only her own. Fourth, relationship management where there is an effort to communicate to develop connection. While the assistant dean was an achiever type of person, this often left little time for relationship management. Being a leader requires the ability to influence others. The ability of influencing others can only be achieved

20    Maria Malayter through continuous communication, respect, and building trust. The assistant dean needed to spend more time speaking with others to gain their perspective and to fully embrace their ideas of both for and against projects to ultimately achieve greater goals together. Multi-dimensional Wellness.  The world of leaders would be much stronger if more attention was paid to the many dimensions of wellness. It is important to understand the many layers of a position and its requirements to determine if the role fit for your own lifestyle and how it might impact your wellness. First, I know I do my best work when I am aware of paying attention to the many dimensions of wellness. Many of the initial concepts of wellness and leadership were discussed in early leadership books authored by successful business CEO’s. Specifically, the book I Dare You written by William Danforth (1942), the founder of the Purina Corporation, discussed a four dimension description of wellness – physical, intellectual, spiritual, and social. When Danforth was younger he had many physical limitations and sickness; one of his teachers dared him to be well. Danforth became determined to be well and it became a focus for himself and all his employees. The assistant dean entered the position with the hope to maintain her wellness which was soon challenged with the workload, a four-hour commute, and many interpersonal conflicts in the role. The concepts of multi-dimensional wellness expanded as Dr Bill Hettler, a medical doctor, began his study of the dimensions of wellness within his work at the University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point in the 1970s. Dr Hettler formulated the first foundational six dimension wellness wheel which included physical, intellectual, emotional, social, spiritual, and occupational (Hettler, 1980). These ideas are very valuable to leaders as a leader focused on wellness will be more impactful in all areas of their lives. In this case, the assistant dean became too focused on the occupational side, then her relationships and physical health suffered. Leaders need to consider their own wellness dimensions and the wellness of their followers. Many organizations today are starting to further invest in the development of work environments that help employees enhance their wellness. The wellness dimensions have expanded beyond the six dimensions to include environmental and financial wellness (Els & de la Rey, 2006) which significantly can impact a leader’s effectiveness, engagement, and presenteeism. There are many ways to understand well-being (Ryff, 1989; Ryff & Singer, 2003) and many organizations are starting to learn productivity benefits from increased employee well-being. The concepts of wellness and well-being can also be found in the leadership lessons of positive psychology and mindfulness at work. Leaders can advance their effectiveness by paying attention to their many dimensions of wellness. Knowledge of Self.  It is of upmost importance to spend the time to learn about yourself when entering into leadership roles. The learning of self while remaining in a leadership role is a continuous learning process as we may change over time and experience. The knowledge of personality preferences, communication styles, and overall strengths can provide the insight to best serve in an organization or even determine if the role fit for your own lifestyle. Leaders and emerging leaders need a good level of self-awareness of their various personality preferences, communication styles, and strengths. Through this awareness, the

Investing the Time to Lead Well    21 leader can easily choose the job tasks and organizational cultures where they can be immediately productive, successful, and happy (Puccio, 2009). There are many ways to considering assessing one’s preferences and styles. A commonly used and easy to understand instrument is the Keirsey–Bates (1984) temperament sorter or the related Myers Briggs Temperament Inventory (Myers & McCaulley, 1985). These temperament inventories help the individual understand how they prefer to operate in the world. It has the dimensions of introversion/extroversion, intuitive/ sensing, thinking/feeling, and perceiving/judging to help a person understand their communication, decision-making, and work organization. In this situation, the assistant dean had a preferred style of being extroverted, intuitive, thinking, and judging style which can often be perceived as condescending in communication through leading work with a more logical perspective compared to a relational approach. This was a blind spot for the leader in her interaction with others. She conducted her work in her primary style versus spending the time to learn and adjust to the personality styles of her team and coworkers. By not understand the various styles, individuals might find themselves in conflict and do not know why. The ability to communicate across many various styles of learning and preferences can significantly help a leader’s ability to connect and empower others to lead in their strengths. The investment of learning about your own styles can help your own individual wellness and be a more effective leader. Leaders can use these inventories to first understand self and then through further study of the other styles better interact with colleagues who may have different communication, temperament, and work styles. The goal is to be adaptable to the various styles to improve communication with colleagues, superiors, and subordinates. It is of upmost importance to spend the time to learn about yourself when entering into leadership roles. By working in strengths and the best possible wellness state, one can be a more effective leader. Being mindful of the dimensions of wellness and levels of stress can impact how one leads in a positive or negative way. People like to work with leaders who are well and have an empowering communication style. As leaders learn more about others communication and personality preferences, it makes them understand and work with their teams better. The key to effective leadership includes knowledge and practice of EI, care for one’s wellness, and the understanding of self and others.

Leaders Invest in Others and Understand Systems The section leading groups will detail the various group dynamics that occurred in the story and then will be aligned with leadership theories. The political skills section will describe the concept of understanding various groups within the organization and ways to influence for change within these groups. The section will include a discussion on organizational politics, relational aggression, and relational leadership. The assistant dean was very happy to take on new roles and leadership status over some of her faculty and administrative peers. She thought she would do her best to serve them and their interests well to support their good work.

22    Maria Malayter When moved to a new campus location, she went to lunch with a colleague to talk about the new role. Days later an administrative assistant filed a complaint with HR stating the assistant dean was spreading gossip of her plans to fire the administrative assistant. An HR investigation was conducted, the complaint was unfounded, and the assistant dean’s personnel record was noted for communication problems for the first time. The assistant dean moved forward in her major student retention project that crossed many job levels and departments. While she served in the junior executive role, the meetings for the retention project had workers across departments and levels such as direct student support, administrative assistants, deans, provosts, and vice presidents. She was the project originator lead and this did not agree well with others at the many various levels. Following one meeting, the assistant dean went to the ladies room. While in the stall, she overheard a provost and an administrative assistant complaining about her leadership. They had been making plans to undermine the project. It took courage and strength to open the stall door and say hello to the ladies that were talking about her. Lastly, the student retention project continued to have conflict specifically with the dean of students. The dean reported her discontent to the provost of academic affairs which then the assistant dean heard of the discontent from her direct supervising dean. The assistant dean was looking for solutions and to minimize conflict so she arranged a meeting with the dean of students. This meeting became part of water cooler gossip and others were alerted in the university. When the assistant dean drove to a satellite campus to meet with the dean of students and was intercepted by the president of the university, the vice president of human resources, and the university legal counsel. This team took her into a backroom office and sat her in a chair to interrogate her about the meeting agenda with the dean of students. The vice president of enrollment, who was best friends with the president, sarcastically mentioned the potential firing of the dean of students. The president, vice president of HR, and legal counsel interrogated the assistant dean about her purpose for the meeting. They asked if she knew about the personnel problems occurring with the dean of students. The team threated the assistant dean and reminded of her communication problems for the second time. This was noted in her personnel file. The assistant dean knew nothing about the problems and only wanted to resolve conflict on the retention project. A week later the dean of students was fired.

Deconstructing from Theory Learning and understanding group dynamics in an organization is very important to be an effective leader. The very first step in understanding groups is reviewing the infrastructure of the organization and the people working within each department. It is important to know the work of each group and their relationship to the groups. It is also important to understand specifically how communication flows between the various groups. The leader would want to ask about the best ways to communicate and to collaborate in the beginning of the work relationship.

Investing the Time to Lead Well    23 Systems and Organizational Politics.  The importance of understanding the group dynamics and the communication styles is to observe what might be the political skills needed to best work in the organization. The assistant dean was promoted internally from a faculty position. With this experience, she had assumed that she knew all the different ways people interacted within the organization. However, this was from a faculty perspective and now she was in an administrative leadership role. The assistant dean needed to take time to understand the systems of the organization from a larger perspective and understand each person’s role. Organizational politics was defined by Greenberg and Baron (1997) as “those actions not officially approve by an organization taken to influence others to achieve one’s personal goals.” These are often unwritten cultural norms or unnoticed personal friendships outside of work. For instance, not having the knowledge of one employee being married or a family member of another employee or when an individual hires colleagues from their past organization. To understand how to navigate organizational politics would be to stay very observant, seek guidance from your supervisor or a mentor, and ask many questions. Through understanding and following the organizational politics, systems, and policies the leader builds trust which can lead to greater influence in the organization. The assistant dean did not take the time to pause and listen to her colleagues as she moved up in the organization from an assistant professor into an assistant dean role. She was a high achiever striving to become a college president. She pressed on to her goals. She blatantly ignored the hierarchy of command within the organization as they were not like her previous experiences. The assistant dean did not take the time to learn the organizational politics. She was slow to learn about the varying tensions in the various departments across the university. She needed to spend more time observing how people interacted and how the varying groups interacted before jumping in to take action. It would have been beneficial for the assistant dean to spend time with an internal administrative mentor in the university to provide guidance on the organizational culture and leadership expectations. This would have helped the assistant dean understand the organization further to gain more trust and credibility in the organization. It may have helped improve her leadership effectiveness. Relational Aggression.  Often in movies and in real life in high school, there always seems to be a story on the “in” or “out” group. Researchers have also tracked this behavior into the workplace (Werner & Crick, 1999). It may be connected to the way people perceive competition on the job. The popular movie Mean Girls was based upon the relational aggression research of Rachel Simmons (2002). Relational aggression can be seen through the actions of group exclusion, threats to withdraw friendships, and intentional ignoring. It is described as social manipulation to damage or threaten damage of reputation, relationship, or social standing (Werner & Crick, 1999). In the workplace, a common type is proactive relational aggression where it is planned and has a goal such as spreading rumors about a person (Burton, Hafetz, & Henninger, 2007). In this case, the assistant dean learned that she was being gossiped about which led to her having hurdles in completing her work.

24    Maria Malayter Driven  sometimes by fear, some followers start competing for status and recognition to gain attention and approval from leaders with greater power in the organization. The intensity of competition for attention can invoke the relational aggression. The project of the assistant dean was leading would significantly increase the revenue of the university through the retention of students. The stakes were high to find a solution to better support the students and the project was talked about at many levels. While the assistant dean did have support at various levels in the organization, many female deans above her were irritated with role boundaries that were broken and the accolades the project was gaining. The assistant dean was interested in helping the students be successful yet some people saw her as trying to steal attention and move into higher roles. Relational aggression can come in many forms including gossip, passive aggressiveness, purposeful withholding information, and accidental intentional criticism. Relational aggression can also be caused by the personal relationships between employees. A friend might undercut another colleague if they fear there will be negative repercussions for their coworker friend. The assistant dean could have helped avoid these tense relational aggression scenarios through reaching out individually to each of her coworkers who might have felt threatened and invited them into larger roles in the project. She also needed to pay further attention to learn the personal relationships that existed between individuals in the organization to understand hidden dynamics. Additionally, the assistant dean need to work further on her direct communication to manage conflict directly instead of the passive aggressive conflict she experienced. Relational Leadership.  The term relational leadership can be misunderstood. Theoretical ways of viewing relational leadership is the basic Leader Member Exchange (LMX) (Liden & Maslyn, 1998) which is looking at the didactic relationship between a leader and a follower. This can mean the level of support, communication, and trust are measured for leadership effectiveness from the follower. One measure of LMX evaluates four dimensions of the relationship affect, loyalty, contribution, and professional respect. Most followers are happier at work when they perceive a higher level of LMX with their leader. The development of strong LMX is important to effective leadership. A key element of leadership is trust and credibility and this is all built through actions. It appeared the assistant dean was known to not follow the organizational politics and might have been considered a gossip in the organization. People did not trust her. The assistant dean learned that a leader must never gossip or complain to people within the organization. In hindsight, she needed to build a professional network of colleagues outside of the organization to hear her challenges versus creating any problem within the organization. The creation of an outside group of colleagues to share ideas with could have provided more unique ways to solve problems and to not damage any relationships within the organization where she worked. Overall, the greatest lesson as a leader from this experience was to invest more time building authentic relationships with colleagues in the organization. This helps build trust within groups and team cohesion. It is also important to have the courage to have difficult conversations to resolve conflict. Facing conflict directly in courageous conversations would have helped build credibility for

Investing the Time to Lead Well    25 this leader. All leadership is relational and the foundations are built on effective communication and trust.

Leaders Invest in Building Organizational Coalitions The section on leading the organization will discuss the considerations for leading a change initiative when starting as a new leader or as an individual newer to the organization. It will include story examples related to missteps in leadership. Then, a review of the appreciative inquiry process will be presented as a solution to build design and agreement for change. The persistent assistant dean pushing her agenda forward continued with the pilot study of the student retention project at the university. The project implementation was ready though much conflict remained. The assistant dean created a meeting notice to review the problems across the systems and departments. The wording of the email aggravated the vice president of enrollment. The vice president of enrollment located the assistant dean outside of her building on the sidewalk to yell at her in public. This led to a discussion with her academic dean team about her effectiveness as a leader in the organization. They discussed a change of the assistant dean’s role and creating a new role as a director at the university overseeing one of her research projects as a director leading an academic center. But was it a solution to the issue or not? The assistant dean moved into the center director role of an academic center. The work continued to be challenging with people and hidden agendas. When she created an international conference with major sponsors, was awarded grant money, and received notoriety with professional associations; the communication challenges were highlighted again. The challenge began after the completion of a very successful conference hosted by the center director. The problems surfaced in the reconciliation of the receipts of the conference. A meeting was called where the vice president of HR and legal counsel reminded the new center director of her poor communication skills for the third time. The university fired her for insubordination.

Deconstructing from Theory Change is inevitable in every organization and every person’s life. Designing change in an organization requires knowledge of change management and solid communication planning. Every change initiative does need an evaluation of the organization with regard to organizational culture, systems, policies, and people impacted. Appreciative Inquiry.  The use of appreciative inquiry is another way to work with building support for a change initiative. The process starts with the evaluation of the strengths of the organization. While outlining the strengths of the organization, the change agent can clearly see the tools available to best support the development of the change initiative. In the director’s role over the academic and community center, she initially created an advisory group that consisted of external and internal stakeholders to build up the center operations.

26    Maria Malayter She conducted strategic planning with this group. However, she needed to further gain more buy in from the stakeholders within the university to create sustainability for the projects with the center. A more robust board of advisors could have participated in the appreciative inquiry process to build support for the center. There are five steps in the process of appreciative inquiry. They are known as the five D’s: Define, Discover, Dream, Design, and Deliver. The first step in the process is to define the challenge or goal for the organization. The second step is to discover the strengths and already existing artifacts that support the change. The third step is to dream about the possibilities for the organization. The fourth step is to design where you describe what should occur. The fifth step is to deliver where action is taken place on the defined plans for the project (Cooperrider, 2008). In the leader’s lesson, there needed to be more of a team collaboration designing the project. This would have led to better relationships and commitment to the project. The center needed to be more embedded into the university and academic plan to create and sustain change and implementation. Personal Leadership Lesson.  The main leadership lesson is to spend diligent time on understanding the organization, systems, and its people when creating a change initiative. Leadership roles carry the responsibility of leading change in organizations. The awareness of models for change and the communication with all stakeholders will lead to a better change process. The leader did not spend the time to study the organization or fully build a strong coalition for the student retention project or the academic center. She did not include all of the stakeholders in the planning and decision-making which would have made both projects more successful. The final lesson for this leader was to notice the consistent resistance. She was successful elsewhere. Why not here?

Conclusion Leadership is an ongoing developmental process. The process is a constant refinement of skills including communication, value clarification, creativity, self-­ awareness, humility, learning agility, and vulnerability. Leadership is an investment in self and others. Investing time to lead well requires maintaining many layers of wellness, relationship, and EI. Failure in leadership leads to new beginnings, expanded purposes, and may offer the greatest leadership innovations.

References Burton, L. A., Hafetz, J., & Henninger, D. (2007). Gender differences in relational and physical aggression. Social Behavior and Personality, 35(1), 41–50. doi:10.2224/ sbp.2007.35.1.41 Cooperrider, D., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J. (2008). Appreciative inquiry handbook: For leaders of change (2nd ed.). Brunswick, OH: Crown Custom Publishing. Danforth, W. (1942). I dare you! St. Louis, MO: Ralston Purina Company.

Investing the Time to Lead Well    27 Els, D. A. & de la Rey, R. P. (2006). Developing a holistic wellness model. SA Journal of Human Resources, 4(2), 46–56. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Books. Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (1997). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hettler, B. (1980). Wellness promotion on a University Campus. Family and Community Health, 3, 77–95. Keirsey, D. B., & Bates, M. (1984). Please understand me: Character & temperament types. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book. Liden, R. C., & Maslyn, J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development. Journal of Management, 24(1), 43–72. Myers, I. B., & McCaulley, M. H. (1985). A guide to the development and use of the MyersBriggs type indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Puccio, G. G. C. (2009). Examining the relationship between personality traits and creativity styles. Creativity and Innovation Management, 18(4), 247–255. doi:10.1111/ j.1467-8691.2009.00535.x Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081. Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (Ed.) (2003). Ironies of the human condition. Well-being and health on the way to mortality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Simmons, R. (2002). Odd girl out: The hidden culture of aggression. New York, NY: Harcourt. Werner, N. E. & Crick, N. R. (1999). Relational aggression and social-psychological adjustment in a college sample. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108, 615–623. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.108.4.615

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 3

Front Porch Organizations, Back Door Employees: How Mentoring Mishaps Potentially Derail Next Generation Leaders Shanita Baraka Akintonde Abstract This chapter combines new and emerging perspectives on career mentoring in the workplace and its role in failed leadership practice from instigated incivility to manipulative mentoring. While numerous scholarly and practitioner-based works on the topic of mentoring, few have offered the perspective of leaders who facilitate failed mentoring dynamics and its effect on employee subgroups, such as millennials. Based on leadership research, theory, and first-hand experience, this author will share through anecdotal evidence, with a d ­ iversity-theme focus on women and millennials, a group that comprises 58 million individuals currently working in corporate positions in the United States (Toosei, 2008) As more millennials join the workplace, professional mentoring plays a significant role in their progress. This research reveals the role that career mentoring can play, when harnessed incorrectly, as a hindrance to the promise and potential of entry-level employees, particularly millennials. The author’s perspective frames this chapter in personal narrative, as she recounts her tale as a Black, female academician and practitioner upon whose own professional trajectory the story of failed mentorship will be loosely based. Keywords: Mentoring; millennials; next generation leaders; protege

Introduction Recent evidence has surfaced that highlights the importance of the employer/ employee work dynamic. Some stories highlight occurrences uncovered due to When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 29–39 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211003

30    Shanita Baraka Akintonde the COVID-19 pandemic, a suboptimal occurrence that has caused workplace climates and those who lead them to fall under increased scrutiny. Millennials are the primary group of employees, in large part, who can seamlessly pivot into virtual workspaces as warranted by the current situation. Their ideology leads to them having different expectations and needs from employers than those held by past generations. As a result, many employee mentors are struggling to adapt. The primary focus on this will be the negative role mentors can play in career development for millennials through the hindrance and promulgation of promise and potential of these entry-level employees. None of the work dynamic research measures the impact of mentoring on the millennial generations’ workplace performance. Instead, these investigations unpack millennial stereotypes as well as theories of engagement. This information is not useful for examining specific workplace practices distinctively suited for the millennial generation. Therefore, this author will further correlate these findings against her own C.A.R.E.1 conceptual framework. The C.A.R.E. Paradigm was derived from three sources: 1. The researcher’s own experience as a female undergraduate from an underserved minority group who, upon entering college 32 years ago, was subjected to affirming and exclusionary mentoring practices within the leadership context. 2. From the research that shows poor mentoring experiences can lead to lasting physical and psychological effects. 3. From the tenor and substance of comments now heard from women and people of color in the workplace who, in the current era, still report mixed feelings within the context of mentoring initiatives designed to include them specifically, as in the story told below.

Imonee Brinkley Story A recent college graduate who attended a four-year university as a business major was an aspiring young woman. Her name was Imonee Lucille Brinkley. Imonee’s mother gave her the middle name Lucille, after her grandmother, the woman who raised her. Lucille had only been able to earn a third-grade education. However, her deep wisdom and mother wit had a great deal of influence on the generations that 1

The term “care” or “caring” as used in this document has two meanings. First, it means the literal meaning of the word, which is defined by Encarta’s North ­American English dictionary as “the providing of whatever is needed for somebody’s well-­ being.” Second, the C.AR.E. principle articulates my educational philosophy and serves as the “north star” of my pedagogical practices that lead students from the classroom to the boardroom. C-Commitment to “Inclusive” Practice in the workplace. A-Advocating and Assessing Employee. R-Recruiting and Retaining Diverse Employees. E-Embodying Principled Leadership (Role Modeling Ethics in Professional Practice).

Mentoring Mishaps Derailing Next Generation    31 followed her, including Imonee. Imonee was determined to make her grandmother proud. The newly minted millennial was poised to enter corporate America, a college degree in one hand, and plenty of enthusiasm in the other. This first-generation college graduate had worked hard as a student, paying her way through school via merit and need-based scholarships due to her parent’s limited resources. For that reason, she had dutifully maintained an excellent G.P.A. throughout school while also working to supplement her scholarship funds. She also gained a great deal of leadership experience by completing several internships, including an international stint that led her to South Africa. Imonee had been president of her campuses’ student business organization and had also worked as a teaching assistant for a well-respected marketing professor on her campus. This university leader had given her a stellar letter of recommendation and encouraged a few of his campus colleagues for the same. With an ever-present “eye on her career prize,” Imonee easily lined up interview after interview and, at the end of her senior year of college, had her pick for which corporation she wanted to work for. She chose a large non-profit, not merely due to its size, but because of its reputation. Imonee was prepared to step on her companies’ Front Porch, Akintonde (2018), a mythological space recrafted by the author to symbolize a welcoming space, like the one found in front of Imonee’s great-grandmother Lucille’s southern home. But when Imonee set foot into the office on the first day of her career life, little did she realize that her grin would be replaced with a grimace. Her hijacked facial expression would be due to Imonee’s failed relationship with her designated mentor – Amanda Ticker. For every inch of happiness Imonee could muster, Ms Ticker had a remedy for it – the majority of which can be surmised into manipulative mentoring tactics. Imonee’s mentor was neither prepared nor equipped to be effective. As a result, Ms Ticker nitpicked everything Imonee submitted, including Imonee’s spirit. After four months, Imonee found each day more difficult than the previous one. Feelings of depression and psychological withdrawal began to manifest. She felt tempted to change her name to ImoneetoGetOuttaHere. Though Imonee only lasted a total of one year in the position, it took much longer for her to regain her once overflowing confidence after the experience. This is due to many factors. First, misguided mentoring can have “explanatory power in predicting protégé outcomes over and above positive mentoring (Eby, Buits, Lockwood, & Simon, 2004). To demonstrate what Imonee’s failed leadership experiences entailed, a taxonomy of negative mentoring experiences will be explored from Amanda Ticker’s perspective.

Amanda Ticker Story Amanda Ticker is a “take-no-prisoners, eat or be eaten, work hard, and then some” type of leader. Her 5ft 10-inch frame was fueled by lean muscle, thanks to the multiple hours spent at her home gym. She was an early riser, often arriving at the office at 7 a.m., yet despite this, she had neither time nor interest in serving as a mentor. Amanda was interested in one thing – self-promotion. She had worked in her current position for almost 10 years,

32    Shanita Baraka Akintonde pulling herself up by the bootstraps, having worked her way up from volunteer to secretarial support to marketing manager, her current coveted position. Though she had no formal educational training, Amanda knew her stuff, learning a great deal from previous bosses on what NOT to do. “Those guys were too nice,” she thought to herself. “They used office time to listen to employee complaints.” She continued, “This is an OFFICE, not The Oprah Show.” Amanda never attended any of her company’s mentoring modules like, “So Now You’re a Mentor or Mentor/Mentee Expectations” and “How to derive meaning from the Mentoring Relationship.” Imonee was Amanda’s fifth protégé in the past five years, with the last two mentor relationships having ended in total disaster. Both protégés left the company in less than two years and within six months of one another, one of who had been a parent of a young child and the other recently married. Amanda told their colleagues, along with anyone else who would listen, “They refused to put in face time past midnight at least once a week, those incompetent weaklings.” Amanda felt that those two failed experiences proved her theory correct. “Most protégé’s, particularly millennials, were members of the pampered privilege set.” For that reason, Amanda did not make time to sit down with Imonee, whom she sized up from a distance within minutes upon learning the new hire was her assigned mentee. Amanda ignored memos placed in her Inbox to set a meeting with Imonee to gauge their common interests and create a regular meeting schedule. “If she is anything like my past mentees, Amanda thought, she’ll just have an excuse for why she is unable to meet after 7 p.m., which is my preferred time. That’s because things will have considerably slowed down in the office by then.” Amanda was the type of leader who could be counted on to get the job done, no matter the cost. This is one of the main reasons that her company higher-ups were either blind to, or simply chose to ignore, her ruse. As a single, childless go-getter with only a few outside associates, Amanda felt she did not have much to lose. She planned to have a corner office with a Vice President nameplate on her desk within five years. Those who complained about her leadership tactics or did not adhere to her stringent rules were subject to being bad-mouthed and called “lazy” or “incompetent” in front of colleagues within the organization. If a protégé caught wind of these behind-the-scenes verbal assaults and attempted to schedule a meeting with Amanda to discuss these issues, she shunned them like the plague. She would even resort to public tactics such as ignoring protégés in company meetings, avoiding eye contact, and in Imonee’s case, deleting emails the young employee sent to her attention. Amanda’s actions were not demonstrative of her company’s Front Porch organizational culture behavior.

Communication Breakdowns Amanda saw her mentees as nuisances and hoped they would either quit or be fired. In most cases, the former did occur. She never saw the role she played in their downfall. She saw the mentoring process itself as the hindrance. Imonee and Amanda’s failed mentoring experience and Amanda’s culpability in the process can be correlated to Lack of Mentor Experience as well as Distancing Behavior, the latter being the most highly related to career support and mentoring, psychosocial support and learning on the job.

Mentoring Mishaps Derailing Next Generation    33 Additional descriptive accounts from the protégé’s experience are found within two additional metatheses’: Manipulative Behavior and General dysfunctionality. Mentoring is an intense developmental relationship whereby advice, counseling, and developmental opportunities are provided to a protégé by a mentor, which, in turn, shapes the protégé’s career experiences (….). This occurs through two types of support to protégés: (1) instrumental or career support and (2) psychological support. (Kram, 1983). As a young employee, Imonee needed a mentor. This chapter will provide six tips for mentors who, like Amanda, might benefit from knowing if faced with mentoring a millennial. Good leaders build on creativity, mainly through capitalization on other talents. In educational settings, this skill is manifested by Champions who simultaneously facilitate campus environments built on trust, commitment, and excitement. Successful leaders are decisive, generate confidence, reward originality, delegate authority, and lead balanced lives (Cash, 1997). Good educational leaders often mentor students, many of whom today are known as millennials. Millennials are comprised of people born between 1981 and 1996 – after Generation X and before a group called Generation Z. They comprise approximately 35% of the workforce, according to an analysis from US Census Bureau data (Cohort, 2012). Many labels have been ascribed to millennials, including entitled job-hoppers (Rousseau, 2001) whose lack of loyalty is readily apparent (Thompson & Gregory, 2012). There is also much evidence about the unique characteristics of millennials (Crumpacker & Crumpacker, 2007; Hanvongse, & Casoinic, 2013), and some studies have examined their needs in the workplace. Listed below are six research trends that, if adopted by mentors like Amanda Ticker, would minimize failed leadership practices by workplace mentors dealing with millennials.

Recommendations for Organizations Provide Opportunities for Intellectual Growth Personal growth is a key component for millennials in the workforce. This is where mentors can help. They can provide their proteges with opportunities for career growth, a factor that is tremendously important to them when choosing a job. To address their desire for growth, mentors should remember two things. First, they must realize that millennials are focused on personal and professional growth. But they are not willing to wait very long. Eighty percent of them indicate they want a promotion within the first three years of employment. Second, mentors should be open to coaching their protégés with clear and frequent feedback. Manipulative mentors use feedback as an opportunity to diminish and demoralize their protégés using their words as workplace weapons. While millennials want mistakes pointed out, they also appreciate appropriate

34    Shanita Baraka Akintonde work behavior accolades as well. In both instances, they need tips for how to make their work better.

Look for Personal Engagement Opportunities Millennials in the workforce need to be highly engaged by what they do. Allowing them to create and run their committees, task forces, or teams to improve the workplace enables them to harness their sense of mission. Without an ability to find meaning in the message, mentors risk losing millennials like Imonee. Here are additional ways that millennials seek to derive meaning from their jobs: Millennials want access. They need to feel like leaders have an “open-door policy” or at least an open phone line at work. Mentors count in this vain. They should take advantage of myriad ways to engage with their mentees and guide their progress. This will allow mentors to demonstrate that they care about millennials as people. Millennials also value teamwork. They want to advance the welfare of groups – including their workgroup – over individual success.

Foster Opportunities for Proteges to Move the Organization’s “Needle” Recommending ways that proteges can infuse environmental programs and social causes into mentoring plans can solicit help solidify the relationship. ⦁⦁ Purpose matters more to them than proclivities. ⦁⦁ And women, in particular, are even more likely to choose mission over

money.

Encourage Authentic and Unique Expression Millennials are willing to ask the question, “How do my qualities and abilities help the company where I work to make a difference in the world? What is my return on investment? This work mentality pertains not only to compensation but to an organization’s values and day-to-day practices. Both items can be shared with the protégé by their mentor.

Recognize Their Desire for a Happy Work-life Balance Millennials are not the kind of employees today who are happy to merely log in eight hours behind a desk doing minimum work for a minimum of time. They need a sense of belonging. Millennials are comfortable creating communities, whether real or virtual, around shared values. ⦁⦁ Mentors can engage with them in this process.

Mentoring Mishaps Derailing Next Generation    35 Acknowledge Who They Are Millennials want a work environment that presents purpose and meaning. They point to service and helping others as having more significance than a high paying salary. Work-life balance is vital to this group as well. Contrary to popular belief, millennials cite a healthy marriage and being a good parent as higher priorities than anything work-related. This is one of the reasons Amanda Ticker got underneath Imonee’s skin because family life is vital to Imonee.

Tell them to Take Suitcases to Their Dreams Millennials want to be able to put their talents and strengths to good use every day. With COVID-19 at the forefront, that desire is even more prevalent. They favor practicality over polarization. Millennials are very confident in their ability to switch jobs and will not hesitate to do so to find what they want and to do so in an aggressive manner. Studies show that millennials are team-oriented thinkers who tend to thrive in workplace environments that foster collaboration and cooperation. These conditions work better than environments where they feel they are competing with co-workers. Openwork conditions are like a professional playground, a sandbox of ingenuity. As a result, millennials turn to leaders and mentors who create environments that are conducive to this type of growth and development. Even after following these tips, successful mentoring is contingent upon the successful implementation of the four stages of the mentoring process that may assist employers: Initiation, Cultivation, Separation, and Redefinition. Kram’s work is the most frequently cited journal article on the topic of mentoring. Additional researchers who examine mentoring (Allen & Johnston, 1997; Burke & McKeen, 1997) define it as a “process for the informal transmission of knowledge, social capital, and the psychosocial support perceived by the recipient as relevant to work, career, or professional development. It entails informal communication, usually face-to-face and during a sustained period. (Chao, 1997; Tepper & Taylor, 2003) These scholars disaggregate a person who is “perceived to have greater relevant knowledge, wisdom, or experience (the mentor) and a person who is perceived to have less (the protégé).

Recommendations for Groups Engage Peer Mentors Within the Organization Amanda would have benefited from instituting a peer mentor support system for her mentoring role with Imonee. Peer mentors “speak the same language” as their peer colleagues. This also allows for more participatory mentor “touchpoints,” especially when mentors are overwhelmed, unqualified, or are somehow unengaged leaders.

36    Shanita Baraka Akintonde Institute Multi-tier Feedback from Company Leaders This type of exposure would allow millennials the benefit of sharing their competencies to various groups, including superiors within the organization and to receive multiple forms of feedback from various stakeholders.

Establish a Diversity Taskforce Millennials will grow and mature in their workplace roles when provided with a variety of perspectives on important issues. Today’s employers would benefit from creating safe spaces that allow millennial employees to take part in frank conversations on topics like diversity issues. These kinds of discussions can have a tremendous impact on one’s success (or lack thereof) within the workplace, particularly in relation to the development of next generation leaders.

Provide Funding for Professional Leadership Growth Opportunities Studies show that affiliation with a professional organization can have a tremendous effect on career growth and leadership skill growth. These groups can serve as a source of mentoring for its members from which millennials can reap significant benefits. A study on group mentoring identified four areas of group mentoring: psychosocial support, inclusion, networking, and role modeling. Each of these factors had a direct correlation with higher job attainment and significant salary increase, areas that millennials have identified as workplace priorities (Dansky, 1996). However, for any of these group mentoring recommendations to work, Amanda would need to be trained. One of the biggest barriers to effective group mentoring is the mentors need to understand and be at ease with group dynamics to take the proper lead in the process. For many mentors, a combined approach, one that provides traditional mentoring praxis with group mentoring may create the best-case scenario. Senior-level employment engagement at the mentor level would best facilitate this process. Group mentoring programs govern themselves by metrics established in Front Porch Organizations.

Conclusion While mentoring is an intense developmental relationship whereby advice, counseling, developmental and leadership training opportunities are provided to a protégé by a mentor, millennials seek definitive markers to shape their career experiences. Kram points to two forms of support for millennials (whom Kram calls protégés) in which this dynamic can occur (1) instrumental or career support and (2) psychological support (Kram, 1983). Most of the mentoring research has outlined the benefits that mentors and protégés can derive through their mentoring relationships, and as this chapter points out, organizational leaders play a key role. That is good news since surveys reveal that millennials who feel compelled to remain at their current place of employment

Mentoring Mishaps Derailing Next Generation    37 for five years were twice as likely to have a mentor. Many of these mentors were assigned by the company brass, who themselves undertook the task. These leaders demonstrated the type of On the Front Porch leadership that Imonee learned from her great-grandmother. However, studies have noted that some mentors and protégés may have relationship problems (Eby & Allen, 2002; Eby et al., 2000, 2008; Kim, Choi, & Gim, 2011). This is not surprising because, like other social relationships, mentoring may entail disappointments, difficulties, and dysfunctional relationship patterns (Simon & Eby, 2003) Such negative aspects are more likely to be noticeable in formal rather than informal mentoring relationships because the formality and mode of contact required by informal mentoring can limit the development of trust and emotional closeness in the relationship (Chao, 2009; Karkoulian, Halawi, & McCarthy, 2008; Kim & Choi, 2011; Tourigny & Pulich, 2005). These type of leadership dynamics are equated to “out of the back door” actions and can lead millennials to and other employees jump ship. Given that today’s millennial groups are the arbitrators of authenticity, the adverse effects found informal mentoring relationships such as those found in the workplace can be devastating. A mentor’s understanding of the impact that failed mentoring practices can have on millennials’ career success is pivotal. Though mentoring can facilitate career development, the potential value of a mentoring relationship is flawed and can lead to destructive relationships. This dichotomy is particularly crucial because it is complicated to sever a negative formal relationship. In contrast, one can easily avoid unpleasant interactions in purely social settings (Labianca et al., 1998), such as informal mentoring relationships. Thus, this writer hopes to help fill the gap in the mentoring literature by not only investigating millennial’s negative mentoring experiences but also providing best practices for formal mentoring processes. Mentoring is a process, and it can be learned, often through flexible solutions (Alsop, 2008; Deal & Levenson, 2016) Failed mentoring is a tumor in the bowels of organizations, hindering company and employee growth and development. Well-established mentor/protégé programs can be an anesthetic against amalgamated workplaces. The type of successful initiatives leads to successful companies that are driven by successful team players. Good mentors make better leaders. Bad mentors make mistakes that, when applied to millennials, can result in becoming an #EpicFail.

References Akintonde, S. (2005). Unleash the leader within you. Teagarden Press. Retrieved from SpecialTopics.com Akintonde, S. (2018). Leading from the heart. Bless your heart and other leadership love lessons. Prospect, KY: Professional Women Publishing. Burke, R. J., & McKeen, C. A. (1997). Benefits of mentoring relationships among managerial and professional women: A cautionary tale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51(1), 43–57.

38    Shanita Baraka Akintonde Cash, J. (1997). What good leaders do. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 27(3), 22–25. Retrieved from eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ556827. Accessed on March 1, 2020. Chao, G. T. (1997). Mentoring phases and outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Church, E. M., & Iyer, L. (2017). “When is short, sweet?” Selection uncertainty and online review presentations. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 57(2), 179–189. Colby, S. L., & Ortman, J. M. (2014). The baby boom cohort in the United States: 2012 to 2060. Current Population Reports, 25, 1–16. Crumpacker, M., & Crumpacker, J. M. (2007). Succession planning and generational stereotypes: Should H.R. consider age based values and attitudes a relevant factor or a passing fad? 36(4), 349–369. Dansky, K. H. (1996). The effect of group mentoring on career outcomes. Group & Organization Management, 21(1), 5–21. Deal, J. J., & Levenson, A. (2016). What millennials want from work. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Professional. Deale, C. S. (2019). Making memories: An example of the scholarship of teaching and learning in hospitality and tourism education. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 31(4), 221–224. Eby, L., Buits, M., Lockwood, A., & Simon, S. A. (2004). Protégés negative mentoring experiences: Construct development and nomological validation. Personnel Psychology, 57, 411–447. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02496.x Eby, L. T., & Allen, T. D. (2002). Further investigation of protégés’ negative mentoring experiences: Patterns and outcomes. Group & Organization Management, 27(4), 456–459. Eby, L., Allen, T., Evans, S. C., Ng, T., & DuBois, D. L. (2008). Does mentoring matter? A multidisciplinary meta-analysis comparing mentored and non-mentored individuals. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(2). Eby, L. T., Butts, M. M. Durley, J., & Ragins, B. R. (2010). Are bad experiences stronger than good ones in mentoring relationships? Evidence from the protégé and mentor perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(1), 81–92. Eby, L. T., Butts, M., & Lockwood, A. (2003). Predictors of success in the era of the boundaryless career. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6), 689–708. Elshaw, J., Fass, D., & Mauntel, B. (2018). Cognitive mentorship: Protégé behavior as a mediator to performance. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 26(4), 358–376. Ghosh, R., Dierkes, S., & Falletta, S. (2011). Incivility spiral in mentoring relationships: Reconceptualizing negative mentoring as Deviant workplace behavior. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13(1), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422311410639 Hanvongse, A., & Casoinic, D. A. (2013). Making a case for the existence of generational stereotypes: A literature review and exploratory study. In R. Burke, C. Cooper, & J. Field (Eds.), Handbook on aging, work, & society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Herzog, R. J., & McClain, K. C. (2017). Assessing stories managers tell. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 39(3), 222–237. Jägervi, L. (2017). Narratives of being a helper: The presentation of supporters and victims in victim support Sweden. Victims & Offenders, 12(5), 800–819. Karkoulian, S., Halawi, L. A., & McCarthy, R. V. (2008). Knowledge management formal and informal mentoring. The Learning Organization, 15(5), 409–420. Kim, J., & Choi, K. J. (2011). Mentors’ negative behaviors in formal mentoring: Their relationship with personality traits, protégé attitudes, and program characteristics. Journal of the Korean Academy of Business. Retrieved from dbpia.co.kr

Mentoring Mishaps Derailing Next Generation    39 Kim, J., Choi, E., Mathew, V., Kim, D., Ahn, D., Gim, J., … Kim, J. (2011). Enhanced high-rate performance of Li4Ti5O12 nanoparticles for rechargeable Li-ion batteries. Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 158(3), A275. Kim, M. J., & Choi, K. (2011). Formal mentors’ distancing and manipulative behaviors: An empirical study on their antecedents and consequences. Journal of Business and Policy Research, 6(3), 91–103 Kim, S. (2010). Mentor characteristics and protégé/mentor perceptions of mentoring functions and quality in Korean companies. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the mentor relationship. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from journals.aom.org Labianca, G., Brass, D. J., & Gray, B. (1998). Social networks and perceptions of intergroup conflict: The role of negative relationships and third parties. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 55–67. Lynch, D., & Madden, J. (2016). Leading school improvement: A focus on the work of a school leader. Matošková, J., Baňařová, M., & Polčáková, M. (2019). Recommendations for effective university study based on students’ point of view. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(3), 381–395. Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into Practice, 47(3), 220–228. doi:10.1080/00405840802153916 Rousseau, D. M. (2001). Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 74(4), 511–541.

Simon, S. A., & Eby, L. T. (2003). A typology of negative mentoring experiences: A multidimensional scaling study. Human Relations, 56(9), 1083–1106. Swap, W., Leonard, D., Shields, M., & Abrams, L. (2001). Using mentoring and storytelling to transfer knowledge in the workplace. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 95–114. doi:10.1080/07421222.2001.11045668 Tepper, B. J., & Taylor, E. C. (2003). Relationships among supervisors’ and subordinates’ procedural justice perceptions and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal. Retrieved from journals.aom.org Thompson, C., & Brodie, J. (2012). Managing millennials: A framework for improving attraction, motivation, and retention. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 15(4), 237–246. Tourigny, L., & Pulich, M. (2005). A critical examination of formal and informal mentoring among nurses. The Health Care Manager. Retrieved from journals.lww.com Van Osch, W., & Steinfield, C. W. (2018). Strategic visibility in enterprise social media: Implications for network formation and boundary spanning. Journal of Management Information Systems, 35(2), 647–682. Wipawayangkool, K., & Teng, J. T. C. (2019). Profiling knowledge workers’ knowledge sharing behavior via knowledge internalization. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 17(1), 70–82.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 4

Toxic Followership: Leader Deception and Breach of Trust Wendy M. Edmonds Abstract Encountering a toxic workplace is almost inevitable. Here, the author shares an experience by describing some of the behaviors of toxic leaders and followers as an example of leadership failure. The story takes place in an organization with a self-serving leader who is contributing to retention issues, exerting power dominance, and operating in a divisive manner. Influencing followers through the use of deceptive practices and manipulation that leads to problems with trust are revealed. This chapter concludes with a discussion of the lessons learned and a reference list. Keywords: Toxic followership; toxic leadership; followership; ethical leadership; trust; organizational commitment

Introduction Johnathan was a well-known general manager of marketing for a Fortune 500 company who managed a staff of five product managers (PMs). Three PMs left abruptly during the probation period and were replaced within a 10-month period. Each PM was responsible for developing an annual strategic plan for their customer base that was segmented into quarterly marketing campaigns. This responsibility required dedicating a large amount of time to research and face-toface visits with customers for the purpose of building relationships. Anissa was the most recent PM to join the team and the only African American professional in the department. The other team members who had been employed together for a while and were friends outside of work, gave her a warm welcome and were supportive in terms of integrating her into the work environment, at least at first. When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 41–48 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211004

42    Wendy M. Edmonds Throughout the year, the managers devoted time to supporting each other by attending events planned for their various customers. Even Johnathan planned team-building events, hosting Dinner & Show nights, and popular outdoor activities. The team seemed to be meshing together well. As time progressed, Anissa began to notice certain comments from her colleagues in monthly review meetings. The PMs were required to conduct presentations describing their upcoming quarterly marketing campaigns. These presentations became a crucial part of planning, especially after Johnathan announced that recent budget cuts would impose constraints on the remaining activities. During the meetings, the usual direct mail and telemarketing promotions were always approved. Anissa was especially creative in designing her integrated plan. Johnathan often sighed or made comments such as, “It’s not that hard; you’re doing too much.” Her marketing efforts led to successful campaigns throughout the year, but teammates also began to make unpleasant remarks about her work ethic, labeling her an over-achiever, as if that was awful. She was surprised because she thought that her good ideas had been one of the reasons she was hired. In an attempt to maintain the cohesiveness of the group, Anissa laughed the comments off and was careful not to offend anyone. She continued to be productive. Johnathan, noticing the brewing hostility among the members of the team toward Anissa, quietly began to manipulate the situation by having side-bar conversations with the other team members. Soon, Anissa sensed a change in their attitudes toward her and, during a one-on-one session with Johnathan, expressed her disappointment with the turn of events. He, however, responded by complimenting her work and, with a broad smile, encouraged her to continue. That meeting reassured Anissa, and she left expecting that the snide remarks during the meetings would end.

The Challenge Over the next several weeks, the bond between Johnathan and the other team members grew noticeably tighter, leaving Anissa feeling excluded, as if she had been refused an invitation to be part of “the club.” One Tuesday afternoon, Johnathan returned from the airport after attending an exhausting meeting that was listed on his calendar as “mandatory.” Once in the office, he scheduled an unexpected required meeting for his staff that would take place later in the week. All five team members joined him in the small conference room with coffee and snacks at the appointed time. Suspense was in the air. There had been constant news coverage about mergers, downsizing, and layoffs taking place across the industry. Johnathan opened the meeting by calming everyone’s fears in those regards, and then he announced, “I found some money in my budget that I have designated for a creative contest.” This was a surprise, for the marketing department who believed they had been operating on a shoestring. He explained that the members of the team would participate in a competition to see who would develop the most innovative marketing campaign, each being required to work within the existing budget and timeline. The top prize would be $2,500, and the campaigns would be evaluated based on creativity and customer response. There were smiles throughout the room, and Anissa was especially excited at an opportunity to display her talent. By the time the meeting ended, her creative juices were flowing.

Toxic Followership    43 Sorting through her list of contacts, she reached out to Carolyn, a local media professional. They met to discuss creating a program that would bring together senior executives from local agencies, industry partners, and manufacturers in a forum to discuss issues impacting the workforce and potential solutions to current problems. The goal was to hold the forum in a studio so that the session could be streamed over the Internet and reach a wide audience; at the time, streaming technology was not used very often. Carolyn and Anissa prepared a program kit and aggressively began to market the idea to all of the parties who would participate. Day after day, they would begin with high hopes only to end up talking to individuals who either had no decision-making authority, thought that the proposal was “cute” but not feasible, or simply failed to show up for the appointment. They refused to give in to frustration, however, and their perseverance paid off when they were finally able to secure the participation of three panelists and a local celebrity to serve as moderator for the forum. Anissa also wanted something special for the inaugural program. She persuaded the event manager of the largest annual industry tradeshow to provide a breakout room from which they could broadcast live. In doing so, those attending the forum could also attend the event. She was excited about showcasing her campaign at the upcoming event.

Presentation Day Midway through the quarter, Johnathan invited the company’s ad agency representatives to join the staff meeting to review the PMs’ presentations of their ideas for the contest and provide feedback. It seemed to Anissa that the other ­presentations were quite ordinary, even though the ad agency representatives expressed enthusiasm. After Anissa presented her collaborative effort with the media professional, she was immediately met with a tongue-lashing for contacting the local media outlet. This public reprimand was accompanied by the order to cease all of her efforts. Johnathan further instructed Anissa to turn the project over to the ad agency for review, which she did, reluctantly. After a two-week review, the ad agency returned to Jonathan all of the documents that Anissa had provided and declared that the forum would not be successful because the projected return on investment could not be calculated. Understanding that telling Anissa “no” would only serve as her motivator, he passed the documents back to her noting the comments from the ad agency. He facetiously told her to proceed. Unbeknownst to him, she had never stopped believing in her project and had the tradeshow and an additional three sessions booked with panelists on the calendar; everything was ready to go. On the opening day of the tradeshow, all of the equipment was set up, tested, and ready. Johnathan and the guest panelists arrived on schedule. The attendees enjoyed the networking prior to the start of the show, which went off without a hitch, but Johnathan abruptly left the room. Anissa was confused at this behavior since the show seemed to have been a success. In any case, with no time to waste, she shifted her attention to preparing for the next show. The end of the quarter was drawing near, and three remaining programs to be streamed, so she maintained her focus. At the end of the month, she received the analytics from

44    Wendy M. Edmonds each program, which included the numbers of attendees (of the live event) and listeners, the frequency of listeners and click-throughs (the number of times that visitors to the website clicked on other tabs or links), and the number of requests to schedule appointments. Carolyn and Anissa reviewed the data with the media statistician, who declared the show a great success. Anissa submitted the results to Johnathan, convinced that it was time to celebrate.

The Big Reveal Johnathan was almost festive at the next meeting. He announced that everyone would receive a reward. That proclamation was unexpected. The first prize was still $2,500, while the second prize was $2,000, the third prize $1,500, the fourth prize $1,000, and the fifth prize $500. He explained that there had been two direct mail campaigns, two telemarketing campaigns, and one integrated campaign involving direct mail, event presence, and telemarketing. He then gave each team member an envelope, thanked everyone for participating in the contest, and wished them all a great weekend. Unsure of what everyone else received, Anissa opened her envelope and counted $500. She was befuddled and could hear whispers and chuckles around the room. Going over to Johnathan, she asked if he made a mistake. “No,” he responded, “I just didn’t think your project was all that good. Maybe next time.” Anissa stood in disbelief as he walked away. The following week, the PMs received an email from Johnathan requesting all of the documents for each campaign for a corporate presentation. Anissa wondered why he would present it to corporate marketing if her project really was unimpressive, but she couldn’t refuse, so she submitted all of the requested material. Things were fairly quiet for the next few weeks, and during this time, Carolyn and Anissa had many discussions, trying to make sense of the creative contest. Then one day, as they were chatting over lunch, Anissa received an email from the vice president of corporate marketing wishing Johnathan well in his new endeavors and introducing the interim general manager of marketing. It turned out that Johnathan had resigned to take a new position elsewhere in the industry. Anissa had mixed feelings about this turn of events.

The Truth Exposed A gathering was held in the office to introduce the new general manager during which Betty, one of Anissa’s teammates, walked over and asked how she was doing. When Anissa responded that she was fine, Betty said, “Good, you were the only one who didn’t know.” When Anissa asked what she meant, she explained that Johnathan had found out just before announcing the contest that he was being offered the new job. He must have promised to bring a new marketing program with him. Knowing that Anissa was the most creative member of the team and would take the competition seriously, he staged the contest to get the most out of her. Yet, he was careful to secretly make it clear to the other team members. This was why their efforts had been so unimpressive. “That guy will do anything

Toxic Followership    45 to make himself look good,” Betty concluded. When Anissa asked why the others were better rewarded when they had not even tried, Betty smiled and said, “You’re not the first one he’s done that to, or the second, and … you won’t be the last. This is why it’s always been a struggle to grow our team beyond the original four members.” Anissa was unable to trust her teammates. She realized that she had been used unknowingly, at the pleasure of her supervisor, to develop a program and conduct a pilot program that would receive successful outcomes. There had never been any intention for the unique integrated program that she and Carolyn developed to receive proper credit or promised reward. When it was reported in the industry trade paper that Jonathan had been named the vice president of marketing for a competitor, she tried to pinpoint precisely when he had begun to put his plan in action, whether it had been when he came back from his “mandatory” out-of-town meeting or after the one-on-one meeting when he had offered her encouragement. She wondered further whether he had contributed to the change in her teammates’ attitudes toward her and whether there were other signs that she missed, but she was unable to make sense of all that happened. Johnathan’s replacement was one of his close friends, and, unsurprisingly, there was no change in the manner in which the team was managed. Anissa was no longer motivated to perform with the zeal for which she had been known for when she was hired on the team. Eventually, she was laid off. Periodically, she would hear from friends still working in the industry that others were peddling the program that she created under a different name, sometimes even forgetting to remove her name from the associated documents.

Lesson #1: Leader Manipulation When Anissa first joined the team, Johnathan devoted time and energy to teambuilding, and the members gave her a warm welcome and seemed to support each other. The problem began when Jonathan realized that Anissa not only brought diversity to the team but also raised the bar, so to speak. He found her way of thinking and productiveness as well as the manner in which she displayed her enthusiasm, troubling. His initial attempts to stymie her creative efforts gave permission to the other members of the team to behave similarly. The negative body language and comments during presentations were intended to signal Anissa that she should conform to the norms of the group. Good leaders do not cling to preconceived notions of the members of their staff. Johnathan labeled Anissa as an over-achiever, a characteristic that he did not value, and abused his authority by making her feel uncomfortable through gestures and unkind comments, thereby creating a breeding ground for negativity within groups. His behavior escalated, by favoring other team members while leaving her isolated. Quality relationships don’t occur by chance, they are built by managers who have an aptitude for listening and use wisdom in appealing to moral principles. Critical thinking and good communication skills nurture ethical decision-making (Johnson, 2018). Johnathan acting in another capacity could

46    Wendy M. Edmonds have cultivated positive relationships by devoting equal time and attention among the team, thereby developing mutual trust and respect (Zuhlke, 2019). Over shadowed by his self-serving desires, he was unable to consider Anissa’s talents and trustworthiness as she tried to adapt to the group norms. On the other hand, the organization would be able to benefit from new team members’ commitment to the organization had there been an investment made in building a cohesive team (Blanchard, 2009; Zuhlke, 2019). Johnathan was clever enough to deceive one team member while exploiting the others to serve his purposes and to choose carefully who would be at the receiving end of his toxic antics. Principals in organizations sometimes create grossly unfair working conditions with little to no regard for the consequences of such efforts to manipulate people and situations (Johnson, 2018; Lipman-Blumen, 2005). Followers, for their part, may endure such exploitation for various reasons. For example, a commitment to impacting change may require staying on in difficult circumstances to improve the workplace, though there are obvious risks involved with seeking the removal of a leader through the proper channels. Alternatively, followers subjected to exploitation may decide to move on professionally. Such career choices can be complex.

Lesson #2: Followers Under the Influence Followers are by definition subject to the power, authority, and influence of their superiors and therefore usually, but not invariably, fall into line (Kellerman, 2008). In this case, the PMs who could have been empowered to bond and collaborate were influenced by a leader who drove a wedge between them and Anissa. Courageous followers are committed to taking ownership of their responsibilities (Chaleff, 2009). Anissa was excited to bring her skills and ideas to the company and become part of the team, but her desire to contribute was misconstrued. Johnathan had the opportunity to lead by example and advocate for goals shared by all team members, thereby facilitating teamwork and increasing job satisfaction (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2017). Unfortunately, by exerting his dominance in a toxic manner, he encouraged members of his team to display counterproductive behaviors. The PMs’ preconceived ideas about Anissa’s work ethic caused them to worry that she was willing to work harder to contribute to the overall mission than they were. Feeling threatened, they relegated her to the out-group, some presumably driven by a desire to demonstrate loyalty to Johnathan. Ideally, followers’ obedience is expected, only to the extent that it serves to accomplish tasks that further the mission of their organization. Obedience that does not serve this purpose threatens to become blind obedience (Edmonds, 2011). Followers must, accordingly, refuse to obey unethical directives. It is unclear why the other PMs under Jonathan’s leadership felt no sense of responsibility to treat Anissa more fairly. Perhaps they had grown immune to his conniving, or had been in Anissa’s place before, or prized their friendships with Johnathan above all else for personal benefit (Clements & Washbush, 1999). That is the unknown. Betty is the exception; for while she at length felt moved to fill in the missing pieces for Anissa, she did so only after Johnathan had left their organization.

Toxic Followership    47

Lesson #3: Toxic Followership is Dangerous In short, toxic leadership nourishes toxic followership (Bell, 2017; Edmonds, 2011). Anissa was the fourth individual whom Jonathan had hired for the same position on his team in less than a year, and his leadership style seemed to have been primarily responsible for the ongoing exodus of PMs. Toxic leadership encourages negative behavior on the job, which in turn contributes to low motivation, poor job performance, and absenteeism (Abbas & Saad, 2020). The absence of any intervention from the human resources department for the way in which he managed his team, gave Johnathan tacit permission to continue doing so in a dangerous manner. In this case, the PMs emulated leader behavior every time they ignored Anissa, sneered during her presentations, or excluded her from conversations. Conversely, the role of followers can be effective (Clements & Washbush, 1999). By delegating power to employees, it is possible to reduce toxicity in the workplace (Abbas & Saad, 2020). Instinctively, leaders and followers’ sense when their actions become dangerous in this regard, and have an obligation to choose not to tolerate harmful acts at any level within their organizations. Whether a leader or follower, each individual has a social responsibility to evaluate their intentions. Be the one who influences others in ways that encourages ethical decision-making. Through deliberate action, it is possible to foster a healthy environment.

Conclusion Leaders may be tempted to yield to misplacing loyalties and exploiting their authority. However, the best outcomes occur when leaders put the needs of followers first and seriously take responsibility for improving their skills in making ethical decisions. I have been on the receiving side of unprincipled leaders who made bad choices. My employment history has been diverse, affording me a wide range of opportunities. I have traveled and held multiple positions in organizations from entry-level to leadership. In navigating my career, I understand how workplace challenges, as painful as they are, can leave you cynical. It is never my desire to operate with a victim mentality. Keep in mind that followers have a responsibility to operate within protocol and stand up to a dysfunctional leader. Therefore, negative experiences seem to propel me into a space of creativity when searching for solutions. Over the years I’ve learned the importance of taking time to invest in being actively involved in professional associations, researching current studies and data, and attending industry events. These are a few of my “goto” resources that help me when I am confronted with leadership issues.

References Abbas, M., & Saad, G. B. (2020). An empirical investigation of toxic leadership traits impacts on workplace climate and harassment. Talent Development and Excellence, 12(3), 2317–2333.

48    Wendy M. Edmonds Bell, R. M. (2017). The dysfunction junction: The impact of toxic leadership on follower effectiveness. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing 10260880. Blanchard, A. W. (2009). Followership styles and employee attachment to the organization. Psychologist-Manager Journal, 12(2), 111–131. Chaleff, I. (2009). The Courageous Follower: Standing Up to & for Our Leaders (6th ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Clements, C., & Washbush, J. B. (1999). The Tow faces of leadership: considering the dark side of leader–follower dynamics. Journal of Workplace Learning, 11(5), 170–175. Edmonds, W. M. (2011). Followership, sacrificial leadership and charisma: A focus group study of survivors from the Jonestown massacre. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.proxy-bs.researchport.umd.edu/docview/1333031151?accountid=9683 Hurwitz, M., & Hurwitz, S. (2017). Leadership is half the story: A fresh look at followership, leadership, and collaboration. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Johnson, C. E. (2018). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership: Casting light or shadow. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. Kellerman, B. (2008). Followership: How followers are creating change and changing leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press. Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Zuhlke, D. G. (2019). The impact of ethical leadership on trust levels between employees. (Order No. 27670114). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.proxy-bs.researchport.umd.edu/do

Chapter 5

Death by Authoritative Leadership and Micro‐management Jennifer Capler Abstract The author lasted a whopping 10 months as a Site Manager for an authoritative micro-managing Executive Director that consistently went back and forth on decision-making. “Do this … I didn’t say to do that … Make ­decisions … Clear all decisions with me first …. Why are you asking me about making a decision?” Her head swung back and forth faster than watching a ping-pong tournament. Other department managers would go to her to vent their frustrations on the same exact issue with the Executive Director. So how do you manage an authoritative micro-manager? How do you deal with yo-yo decision-making? It wasn’t until after leaving the organization and recovering from the stress of the whole ordeal that she broke everything down and created a better solution than the one used. This lesson on leadership failure starts by detailing the 10 months of stress torture. The author endured with details about the types of leadership styles used, and what could have helped on an individual level. Even if a person is not the designated leader of the organization, she can still be the better example of how to lead. This lesson concludes with the outcome of her 10-month torture and how it made her a better leader today. Keywords: Authoritative leadership; micro-management; situational leadership; toxic leadership; transformational leadership; decision-making

Introduction My family had moved to a new location while I was nearing the end stage of earning my doctoral degree, making the final modifications and submissions. Since I was past all of the grueling class work, I decided it was time to seek employment, When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 49–57 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211005

50    Jennifer Capler utilizing the knowledge I had gained over the years. To my surprise, I was contacted by a non-profit organization that was looking for my exact skill and knowledge set. Little did I know what I would be in store for over the course of 10 months. Looking back now, all the signs of an authoritative leadership style were there from the start. My individual integration of situational and transformational leadership styles into the workplace created a clash of the titans, so to speak. The dysfunctional leadership style of authoritative micro-management by the Executive Director created a toxic atmosphere that seeped into every crack it could find. By the time I gave up the fight and resigned from my position, there was no crack untouched by it.

A Little Background It all started with a surprise phone call asking if I would interview for Site Manager of a non-profit organization. The organization provides public services to the community and has an education facility for developmentally disabled adults. I was flattered that someone picked my resume when I hadn’t even applied for the position. After the initial phone interview, I traveled to the home office in a different town to have an in-person interview with the Executive Director of the organization. The Executive Director was friendly, personable, and up-front about needing someone to come in and repair a satellite location after months of experiencing dysfunctional management. As experts in our fields, we know that dysfunctional leadership can destroy any organization by creating poor reputation and distrust among the all of the employees (Dandira, 2012). The site I was hired to manage was experiencing that distrust and there were certainly no healthy relationships among the mid-level managers and their subordinates. The previous site manager had been diagnosed with cancer and tried to work through the chemotherapy and doctors’ appointments. It did not take long for everyone at the facility to notice the manager napping during the day or leaving work very early in the day. The mid-level managers attempted to make up for the lack of in-house leadership and limited head-quarter involvement by taking charge. The low-level employees rebelled, telling the managers that they were not the boss and had no right to tell them what to do. The performance at that site started to decline, along with morale. The Executive Director finally tried to step into the site and get control of the dysfunction between the mid-level managers and the low-level employees but struggled with the time management of traveling to that specific site location while also managing the entire organization overall. The whole organization provides eight community services in four counties, with six different site facilities (including the home office). The demand on the Executive Director was too much of a strain and it was starting to affect the rest of the organization’s functionality. Now we insert me, hired to take control of one of the site facilities and get it back into functional and organizational order. In my first tour of the facility, before my official first day of work, the Executive Director took me through the entire site. Looking back now, I should have seen the red flag when the Executive Director intentionally did not introduce me to the mid-level managers. Intentionally, the Executive Director said she wanted to stir the pot a little and keep all of the employees on their toes.

Death by Authoritative Leadership and Micro-management    51 On my first day of work, the employees’ assumption that I was going to be the new Site Manager was confirmed with my official introduction. And so began the squinty glares in my direction and whispers behind my back. It didn’t take long for me to get to know all of the employees, from the parttime low-level employees to the front office that I was also supposed to be half in charge of. I was replacing a beloved boss, who allowed everyone to do whatever they wanted and did not care much about structure or state and federal regulations. Everyone made it a point to tell me how much they loved their previous boss and what they thought was the best way to let them do what they wanted. The mid-level managers were chomping at the bit to give me the low-down on how horrible everyone else was but how good they were. I could see why the Executive Director was so eager to get someone into the site management position. It was in pure chaos. In the beginning, my change management efforts and leadership were praised by the Executive Director. I incorporated my knowledge of effective change management strategies while learning every aspect and service of the entire non-profit organization. I started working on interdepartmental relationships immediately to increase employee morale and decrease conflict. There were 10 employees in the education section of the facility that I was 100% responsible for. I made it a point to sit down with each employee individually to discuss how things have been going and what changes they thought the facility needed to become compliant with state and federal regulations. I made it a point to use active listening skills and take notes of their ideas. I wanted every employee to know that their input and their role in the organization was important. I was reorganizing files, soothing hurt feelings, and reincorporating structure. While there were some hiccups with employee kickback, morale and performance were starting to improve. When the employees started to realize that I was not there to be a dictator, they started coming on board with making changes that would make their jobs easier. They felt like their suggestions were important, like they mattered. This was something they valued since they had overheard the Executive Director saying they were all replaceable and they didn’t matter. Of course they made it a point to tell me that once I gained their trust and respect. Everything was starting to pick up in the facility. As a team, we started implementing new education and activity programs for the clients. We started making the necessary changes to make the clients more responsible for their behaviors and actions. The clients are a protected class in society so making the changes was not easy with the client’s parents and caregivers. Nor were they fully appreciated by the parents and caregivers. Word was getting back to the Executive Director that we were not being flexible. The state has specific regulations when working with a protected class of citizens. The Executive Director started making demands that the facility be more flexible than the state allowed us to be. The next moment I would get an email asking why I was not following the state regulations to the letter. Other demands from the Executive Director started becoming erratic. I was requested to implement certain changes and not others. When I did, I would be called to the main office to explain why I was making those specific changes. If I stated “because you said so,” the Executive Director would say “no I didn’t” and that I needed to do something

52    Jennifer Capler else instead. I would implement that something else to keep the Executive Director satisfied, only to be asked why I was making that change instead of the very first one I had tried to make. It was very taxing on me and my employees. I started to see why the turnover in my facility had been so high prior to me taking over. There was a constant barrage of emails and phone calls from the Executive Director about why I was doing something that she had told me to do in the first place. I started requesting confirmation of her requests via email just to have it in writing so I could respond with the emails in quotes when asked why I was doing something. Not once did the Executive Director take responsibility for the whiplash decision-making. I was beginning to question my capabilities as a Site Manager and my leadership skills. Five months into this position I discovered that every department manager had this experience. I started non-chalantly asking about other managers relationships with the Executive Director and how they handled the barrage of ever changing demands. I was able to find out very quickly just how low the morale was among the all of the department managers and how many were contemplating leaving because their health and family relationships could no longer handle the constant communication of the Executive Director expected from the managers. By constant, I mean all managers were expected to be available and respond to the Executive Director into the very late hours and weekends when no one was at the entire organization except the Executive Director. At about nine and a half months of the authoritative micro-management, I finally snapped and submitted my letter of resignation, which was a one-line email because I was afraid of what else I might say. While I had managed to create amazing relations between the mid-level managers and the low-level employees, there was nothing I could say or do anymore to appease the Executive Director. We had passed a state inspection with a near perfect score, something that was rare with the entire state. Bickering between the employees was down to a minimum. The problem was that I was no longer catering to any and all demands of the client’s caregivers, which rarely took the laws and regulations into consideration. This was not acceptable by the Executive Director. The final email from the Executive Director took a berating tone that I was not being flexible and bending state laws and rules. I was done. I couldn’t take it anymore. The employees were upset that I was leaving them, but they fully understood why. By sending the one-line resignation email, it was like a weight had been lifted that there was going to be an end to the constant stress from the Executive Director. I do not regret taking the position nor do I fault myself for leaving before even a year of employment. It was the most difficult management position I had ever been in, forcing me to question my own leadership skills and capability. I was starting to believe that I was the problem. Once I left, and recuperated, I was able to reflect upon the entire experience and expand my knowledge through first-hand experience.

A Personal Lesson in Leadership After taking some time to recover my health and sanity from the stressful work experience, I started to reflect upon my time as the Site Manager. I was

Death by Authoritative Leadership and Micro-management    53 contemplating how I responded to the Executive Director and the client’s caregivers. I debated if there was another way I could have handled the situation. Since I was no longer in the situation, it was easier to be able to look at the whole experience through a researcher’s lens. It almost became a topic of obsession as I had never had such a horrid and stressful experience like this before. I came to the conclusion that when working in a non-profit organization that is geared toward educating a protected class of citizens and provide community services, that there are ethical obligations that should not be ignored. I realized that I should have paid far more attention to the underlying culture of the entire organization instead of just my own facility. Finally, it became apparent that in order to deal with an authoritative micro-managing leader, transformational and situational leadership styles could have led to a more controlled work relationship.

Ethical Responsibility Every organization, especially non-profit organizations, has an ethical responsibility to their target market and the society in which they reside (National Council of Nonprofits, 2020). When I started working for this non-profit organization, it was made clear to me that my ethical responsibility was the safety and welfare of the protected population of clients that we catered to, while adhering to state and federal regulations. As such, I carried out my responsibility to ensure that our clients’ needs were not only met at our organization but also they were being met outside our organization as everyone that helps developmentally disabled adults become mandated reporters once employed in that particular field of work. On more than one occasion, the Executive Director felt I was overstepping the bounds on my ethical obligation to the clients. As per the state rules, I was obligated to report any suspicion of abuse or neglect regardless of organizational standards (Illinois Department of Human Services, 2020). The state, not the organization or any individuals involved, is required to conduct an investigation and determine results. The protected class of adults was known for elaborating stories, but the state made it clear that it was not my place to determine what was valid and what was not. There were caregiving facilities that did not approve of the state regulations and the Executive Director catered to their demands just to retain their business and keep a source of revenue for the organization. I threated that revenue source by allowing my mid-level managers to make more than one call to the state as a mandated reporter. I realized that once I held my ground and supported the decisions my mid-level managers were making on reporting to the state that responses and requests from the Executive Director had changed. I held firm that our facility and all employees had an ethical obligation to each and every client regardless of personal opinions. As such, the mid-level managers and low-level employees were more confident in ensuring the clients had a safe environment in our facility and at their homes. Bonds between the clients and employees were strengthening and cases of reporting had drastically decreased by the time I left the organization.

54    Jennifer Capler Organizational Culture Organizational culture is what holds a company together but also influences decisions and actions throughout the organization (Tharp, 2009). It consists of socially constructed patterns of values and assumptions. While the values of a non-profit organization are typically outlined by the Board members in a statement of value or code of ethics, the assumptions are the underlying attitudes, thought processes, and actions that are carried out by everyone else. The goals and vision of the non-profit organization were geared toward helping residents in four counties with various public assistance services and provide an education facility for adults with developmental disabilities. The non-profit organization achieved its goals and vision with state, federal, local, and privately funded community programs. The Executive Director also had to monitor the financial health of the organization and had made it clear that the organization needed to make sure it had a positive revenue at all times. When I started asking other managers about the organizational culture, I found that only two of the eight managers (including me) thought the overall culture was healthy. The other six managers (again, including me) felt that there was a great deal of stress from trying to manage their programs within state guidelines, organizational goals, and maintain a positive revenue, while dealing with micro-managing. This was creating a chaotic and stressed culture among the managers that was bleeding down into the employees that they managed. Even I was not immune to the trickle-down effect. However, I had created such an open environment that the employees were starting to tell me that I needed to step back from a situation before responding and that I should take a small vacation to get some rest.

Combining Transformational and Situational Leadership Styles During my time as a doctoral learner, transformational leadership was heavily emphasized as the way of the future. I can’t say for sure whether this was teacher or university bias, but it was a predominate theme in leadership theory classes. Even my individual leadership assessment reflected that of a transformational leader. This leadership style is more apt to help followers grow and develop into leaders themselves through empowerment, motivation, trust, and delegation (Clawson, 2013; Hickman, 2016). There is an emphasis on each employee to take the initiative and increase his or her knowledge and self. Leaders encourage learning and teaching from each other to improve the moral conduct of the entire organization, maintaining regular communication. There is a heavy emphasis on intellectual stimulation and inspirational motivation, through individualized consideration. Situational leadership takes into account contextual factors and how the overall situation will affect the appropriate leadership response (Clawson, 2013; McCleskey, 2014). Leaders following a situational model tend to be more sensitive to their follower’s level of readiness and maturity in a situation and will adjust their own behaviors in accordance to the needs of the followers (Wren, 1995). Leaders adjust their styles from directive, managing, coaching,

Death by Authoritative Leadership and Micro-management    55 and delegating depending upon the maturity level of each subordinate. How a leader responds to their followers is contingent upon each individual followers capability. Upon reflection of my time as the Site Manager, it became apparent that I needed to be more of a situational leader with my Executive Director. Being a transformational leader and inspiring the employees I was directed to manage worked to the benefit of the facility and the clients they served. I encouraged and motivated the employees to create new programs and learn how to better manage behaviors. What that style did not do was create a cohesive working relationship with an authoritative micro-managing Executive Director who did not appear to have a comprehension of leadership styles and approaches. While it wasn’t necessarily my job to teach my boss about effective leadership, it was my job to approach the situation as an expert in leadership.

Authoritative Leadership Authoritative leadership is more focused on controlling performance and outcomes to meet an organizational goals with unquestioning support from followers (Bass, 2008). This leadership style tends to be more controlling and poweroriented, which can generate some bias on being open-minded to other approaches. The Executive Director was a Head Nurse at a large hospital at one point, which would make sense to require an authoritative leadership style. That position would require someone to make decisions that would require others to implement without regard to feelings (Sadler, 2003). Moving into a non-profit organization that works with community services and developmentally disabled adults requires taking a more personable and flexible approach, inspiring and encouraging compassion among followers for the clients they service. It is important to instill a sense of a chain of command and encourage results, but not to regulate the behavior of subordinates that work in already emotionally taxing situations.

Micro‐Management Micro-management is something that I consider a cancer to any organization where it is not necessary. Even then, I don’t really know if it should be necessary in any organization. Micro-management goes hand-in-hand with authoritative leadership as it is excessive direction and control over a person, group, or system (Serrat, 2017). If an employee requires micro-management, maybe they need more training and education. Or maybe the manager needs to trust their employee more and hold that employee responsible for their actions and decisions. But what happens when you are the Executive Director of a large, non-profit organization and your main go-to style drips heavily of micro-management? You create a toxic organizational culture that is very stressful to everyone. Micro-managers feed on their authority, on having ultimate knowledge over everything at all times. But what they don’t realize is the detrimental impact it has on everyone else and themselves. It creates a high-turnover and negatively impacts work quality. I have never been one to be micro-managed. I have always had a strong personality

56    Jennifer Capler and have never been made to feel like I couldn’t manage my own department before. It was something new to me, so it threw me for a loop.

Conclusion An effective leader is evaluated by his or her critical thinking skills, adaptability, communication skills, ability to empower followers, vision, the ability to facilitate group activities, make and implement decision, and manage conflict (Wren, 1995). As a Doctor of Management in organizational leadership, I feel it is my job to help others expand their own leadership skills. Personally, I love to empower others to think for themselves about how to handle situations and people. I am always asking others why. During my time as a Site Manager, I forgot to ask myself why. Why I was responding to my boss in the manner that I was. It took time for me to ease tensions of the employees of the site I was supposed to manage. They had gone from being able to do whatever they wanted to me wanting adherence to state rules and regulations. I incorporated slow change management techniques, easing fears of change by making each person’s opinion heard. I allowed the employees to have opinions in how we could make things better as a team. I had their backs when they made decisions as long as they took responsibility for the outcomes of their decisions. What I did not take into consideration was that my own boss had no concept of effect leadership skills. How the Executive Director treated my first tour of the facility I was to manage should have been my first indication that something was amiss. Over time, I got caught up in trying to appease my boss more than using my skills as a transformation and situational leader to encourage my boss to be and do better. While it is not necessarily in our job description to be a leader to our bosses, I would argue that we have an obligation to our organizations and fellow employees to take control of poor leadership situations. We can lead by example and incorporate situational and transformational techniques by motivation and inspiration. We may not be responsible for the actions of others but we can encourage everyone to be and do better. I am glad that followed my own gut in creating a strong positive culture among my own department and stuck to strong ethical obligations. To this day, the employees and the clients will go out of their way to say hello when they see me in town. By the way, the Executive Director quit shortly after I did. I found out that there was an uprising from several departments (both employees and managers) that went to the Board of Directors to make sure they were being heard about how they were being treated and told to ignore state law in favor of revenue. It was a non-profit organization. It was never supposed to be about revenue. I do actually feel bad for the now ex-Executive Director. Managing six facilities in four different counties that provide eight community services is not an easy task. There was only so much state and federal funding to go around, so fundraisers had to be planned to obtain private funding. The Executive Director and I did once have a conversation about her ability to delegate. I asked her if she had considered asking the Board for an Assistant Executive Director. She said she didn’t

Death by Authoritative Leadership and Micro-management    57 want to make financial demands of the Board. Some of the stress the Executive Director endured was self-induced by not asking for help or delegating responsibilities to the department managers. Micro-management can be the death of you.

References Bass, B. M. (2008). Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research & managerial applications (4th ed.). New York City, NY: Free Press. Clawson, J. G. (2013). Level three leadership: Getting below the surface (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Dandira, M. (2012). Dysfunctional leadership: Organizational cancer. Business Strategy Series, 13(4), 187–193. doi:10.1108/17515631211246267 Hickman, G. R. (Ed.). (2016). Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Illinois Department of Human Services. (2020). FAQs of reporting abuse/neglect of people with disabilities. Retrieved from https://www.dhs.state.il.us/page.aspx?item=29428 McCleskey, J. A. (2014). Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 117. National Council of Nonprofits. (2020). Ethical leadership for nonprofits. Retrieved from https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/tools-resources/ethical-leadership-nonprofits Sadler, P. (2003). Leadership (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page. Serrat, O. (2017). Knowledge solutions: Tools, methods, and approaches to drive organizational performance. Singapore: Springer Tharp, B. M. (2009, April). Defining “Culture” and “Organizational Culture”: From anthropology to the office. Interpretation a Journal of Bible and Theology, Harworth. Retrieved from http://www.haworth.com/docs/default-source/whitepapers/defining-culture-and-organizationa-culture_51-pdf-28527.pdf ?sfvrsn=6. Wren, J. T. (1995). The leader’s companion: Insights on leadership through the ages. New York, NY: The Free Press.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 6

Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned Cheryl Patton Abstract Organizational crises can wreak havoc in an institution. When such crises ensue, leaders are tasked with decisions that often need to be made quickly and effectively. When not responded to adequately, consequences can include leader regrets of improper response, high costs to the organization, loss of leadership position, or even arrests or jail time for a leader. This chapter describes all these repercussions as it summarizes the Jerry Sandusky case and highlights the crisis that took place on the campus at Penn State University. In illustrating the University leaders’ response to the crisis, leadership lessons learned from the case were gleaned. They include increased transparency, greater reflectivity, ethical decision-making, and periodic assessment of organizational culture. Keywords: Authentic leadership; crisis leadership; decision-making; ethical leadership; leader–member exchange; organizational culture

Introduction Crises are high-stakes, high-pressure situations involving intense difficulty or danger. Organizational leaders can be thrust into crisis situations at a moment’s notice (McNulty, Marcus, & Henderson, 2019). Crisis management literature associates factors such as threat of harm, frequency, relationships, uncertainty, and decision-making to crises (Gilstrap, Gilstrap, Holderby, & Valera, 2016). When crises occur, leaders must respond to them quickly, making consequential decisions where much is at risk (Oroszi, 2018). Failures in crisis leadership can result in leader regrets of improper response, high costs to the organization, loss of leadership position, or even arrests or jail time for a leader. This chapter will When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 59–70 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211006

60    Cheryl Patton reveal a university’s crisis response that led to all of these adverse consequences. Since crisis leadership and management is often overlooked in business schools and other trainings, reviewing such cases while looking for leadership lessons learned, can benefit leaders and managers (Powley & Taylor, 2014).

Contextual Background Pennsylvania State (Penn State) University is the state’s flagship public university located in State College, Pennsylvania. The school’s athletic teams participate in the Division One Big Ten Conference. Football is exceedingly popular at the University; its program has generated profits of up to $53 million a year (Moushey & Dvorshak, 2012). Football coach Joe Paterno hired Gerald (Jerry) Sandusky in 1969 and promoted him from assistant to defense coordinator eight years later. In 1977, Sandusky launched The Second Mile, a charity for at-risk children (Moushey & Dvorshak, 2012). These roles led to his prominence in the State College community. At the height of his career, a 1999 news release from Penn State announced Sandusky’s retirement. His generous retirement package included access to football and recreational facilities and an agreement that the University would work collaboratively with Sandusky on The Second Mile (Freeh, 2012, p. 21).

Incidents Creating the Crisis As aforementioned, crises involve threat of harm, frequency, relationships, uncertainty, and decision-making (Gilstrap et al., 2016). Each of these was a significant factor in a crisis at Penn State University. The following incidents created the crisis.

Incident One One year prior to Sandusky’s announced retirement, a mother of an 11-yearold summoned campus police asking to have Sandusky arrested. Involved in the Second Mile, her son came home with a wet head after spending time with Sandusky. Upon her questioning him about this, he told his mother that he took a shower with Sandusky in Penn State’s Lasch Building. The University police initiated an investigation of this incident and informed Athletic Director Timothy M. Curley, who then notified two top University leaders: Senior Vice-President of Finance and Business, Gary C. Schultz and then-president, Graham Spanier. Curley informed Spanier and Schultz that he apprised Paterno of the situation. Sandusky told a University police detective and a caseworker that he hugged the child but it was not sexual in nature. He was told not to shower with children again and the case was closed (Freeh, 2012).

Incident Two In November 2000, a janitor in the Lasch Building at Penn State witnessed Sandusky sexually assaulting a boy in the showers. While he left the area to alert his

Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned    61 coworker, Ronald Petrosky, Petrosky walked into the shower area and noticed the feet of an adult and a younger person under the partition. Upon exiting the shower area, Petrosky saw Sandusky walking out with a young boy in tow. Calhoun eventually found Petrosky, relayed his sighting and expressed his shock and agitation about what he witnessed (Moushey & Dvorshak, 2012, pp. 77–78). Neither man reported the incident because they feared their jobs would be put at stake if they did so. One believed “they’ll get rid of all of us” and the other felt that the “University will close ranks to protect the football program” (Freeh, 2012, p. 22).

Incident Three Mike McQuery, Paterno’s graduate assistant, walked into Penn State’s Lasch Building on February 9, 2001. He witnessed Sandusky molesting a young boy. He immediately informed his father of the assault and asked him for advice on how to correctly proceed. It was agreed upon that Mike should report the incident to Paterno, which he did the next morning (Moushey & Dvorshak, 2012, pp. 45–46). McQuery told Paterno that he had seen something terrible the night before in the Penn State football facility … I had seen Coach Sandusky engaged in a very bad sexual act, molestation act with a minor … a boy roughly 10 or 12. (Dauphin County Court Reporters, 2012, pp. 8–9) Paterno then conveyed the occurrence to Curley and Schultz on Sunday, February 11, 2001. Schultz contacted University legal counsel, Wendell Courtney, the same day. The following day, Schultz, Curley, and Spanier met to discuss their options. They met again on February 24–25 and, according to Schultz’s notes, created an action plan. They planned to “3) Tell chair of Board of Second Mile 2) report to Dept of Welfare. 1) Tell JS [Sandusky] to avoid bringing children alone into Lasch Building” (Freeh, 2012, p. 23). A few days later, Curley told Spanier and Schultz that he and Paterno discussed the action plan and thought a more “humane” way of approaching the plan was in order. Curley stated that he would tell Sandusky that they felt there was a problem and that he needed “professional help” (p. 23). If Sandusky cooperated, they would help him “to handle informing the Second Mile” (p. 23). If he refused to cooperate, Curley noted, “We don’t have a choice and will inform” his charity and the Department of Welfare (p. 23). Spanier and Schultz agreed to this approach, although Spanier mentioned, the only downside for us is if the message isn’t ‘heard’ and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road. The approach you outline is humane and a reasonable way to proceed. (p. 23) Schultz then remarked, “we can play it by ear” about reporting to the Department of Welfare (p. 23).

62    Cheryl Patton On March 5, 2001, Curley held a meeting with Sandusky, advising him that administrators were “uncomfortable” with what they learned about the situation and that it would be reported to the Executive Director of his charity. Curley also expressed that Sandusky “was not to be in athletic facilities with young people” (Freeh, 2012, p. 64). Curley alerted the Executive Director of Second Mile that someone in the locker room saw Sandusky with a boy, and that person was “uncomfortable” about what he witnessed. Curley told the director that he spoke to Sandusky about it and “determined nothing inappropriate had occurred” (p. 64). The Executive Director and two Second Mile board members came to the conclusion, upon hearing this information, that “it was a non-incident for the Second Mile” (p. 64). The University President did not inform the Board of Trustees of either Sandusky investigations, per records (Freeh, 2012). In 2011, the trustees put Curley on “administrative leave” and Curley re-retired (p. 29). They also removed Spanier and Paterno from their positions in the wake of the Sandusky abuse scandal (Viera, 2011). On November 5, 2011, Sandusky was arrested on 40 criminal counts of child molestation. Concurrently, Curley and Schultz were accused of perjury and failure to report assumed child abuse (Chappell, 2012). A year later, the University President was charged as well (Isikoff, 2012). In the wake of these charges, chaos, confusion, and sadness supervened on the campus of the University, nicknamed Happy Valley.

Aftermath On November 21, 2011, Ken Frazier, Penn State’s Board of Trustee appointed to head the special committee investigating the abuse scandal, announced that the University hired former FBI director, Louis Freeh to conduct “an independent investigation of Penn State University’s role in allegations of child sex abuse by former football coach Jerry Sandusky” (Curry, 2011, para. 1). In his report, Freeh noted, “Four of the most powerful people at [Penn State] … failed to protect against a child sexual predator harming children for over a decade” (Freeh, 2012, p. 14). The following paragraphs reveal the aftermath of the crisis as it pertains to the leaders involved in dealing with the crisis, as well as the abuser who caused it to occur. On November 9, 2011, four days after Jerry Sandusky was charged with sexually abusing eight young boys, Joe Paterno was fired from the University, approximately 12 hours after announcing his upcoming resignation scheduled for the end of the football season. Three months later, on February 22, 2012, Paterno died of complications of lung cancer at the age of 85 (Kiner, 2018). He had never been charged with a crime but the Freeh Report concluded that he “hushed up a 2001 complaint against Sandusky showering with a boy, for fear of bad publicity” (Scolforo, 2017, para. 9). Additionally, one of more than 30 Sandusky accusers testified in 2014 that he had “suffered at the hands of Sandusky” as a 14-year-old boy in 1976, while showering at a football camp at Penn State. The accuser claimed he told Paterno about the incident “with several people nearby”

Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned    63 (Simpson, 2016, para. 5). Paterno allegedly responded, “I don’t want to hear about any of that kind of stuff, I have a football season to worry about” before walking away from the boy (para. 6). Paterno’s family vehemently denies that accuser’s claim (Scolforo, 2017). Jerry Sandusky was convicted of 45 counts of sexually abusing 10 boys in June of 2012. He was later sentenced to 30–60 years for child molestation on October 9, 2012 (Johnson, 2012). Despite a number of appeals regarding sentencing, the original sentence remains the same (Andone & Sanchez, 2019; Rushton, 2020). Sandusky maintains his innocence, stating that he is the victim of a conspiracy led by the falsehoods told by troubled young men (Johnson, 2012). Nevertheless, Penn State’s financial statement covering fiscal year ending June 30, 2016 revealed that the University paid $93 million in settlements to 33 accusers (Peterson, 2016). On October 30, 2019, reports indicated that Penn State was investigating a new sexual abuse allegation against Sandusky (Vigna, 2019). Perjury charges against University leaders, Spanier, Curley, and Shultz were all dropped in 2016 (Rushton, 2016). Curley and Shultz pleaded guilty to child endangerment on March 13, 2017. In exchange for the plea, felony charges of conspiracy against the pair were dropped (Couloumbis, Snyder, & Roebuck, 2017). On March 24, 2017, a jury convicted Spanier of child endangerment but acquitted him of conspiracy and a second count of child endangerment (Slotkin, 2017). Spanier, Curley, and Shultz were sentenced on June 2, 2017. Spanier was sentenced to four to 12 months, with the first two months spent in jail and the rest on house arrest. Curley’s sentence consisted of seven to 23 months, with the first three in jail. Shultz received a sentence of six to 23 months, with two months spent in jail (Domonoske, 2017). Curley and Shultz spent time in Pennsylvania’s Centre County Correctional Facility. Both men testified against Spanier but Spanier appealed his conviction (Falce, 2017). One day before Spanier was to have started his two-month incarceration, a federal judge overturned the child endangerment conviction (Witz, 2019).

Leadership Lessons Learned Sandusky was viewed as a leader on campus, due to his emeritus status and the University’s collaboration with Second Mile. He used his status with the highly esteemed football program to entice boys to campus and molest them. Powerful men who sexually prey on those with less power need to be terminated from their positions and held accountable for their actions. In this case, however, the leadership group, whose decisions made during the crisis could have prevented further child rapes, missed the opportunity to stop the abuse. This is evidenced by the remarks of regret from the leaders themselves. On November 9, 2011, Paterno released a statement that included, “With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more” (Layden, 2012, para. 6). At their June 2017 sentencing, Spanier, Curley, and Shultz all apologized for their actions. Spanier stated, “I deeply regret that I did not intervene more forcefully” (Hobson, 2017, para. 7). Curley proffered, “I am very remorseful I did not comprehend the severity of the situation. I sincerely apologize to the victims and to all who were impacted because of my

64    Cheryl Patton mistake” (para. 8). He added, “I pleaded guilty because I felt like I should have done more” (para. 19). Likewise, Shultz expressed regret: “It really sickens me to think I might have played a part in children being hurt. I’m sorry that I didn’t do more, and I apologize to the victims” (para. 9). Prosecutor Laura Ditka offered criticism of Spanier’s leadership, saying, “He was a complete and utter failure as a leader when it mattered most” (para.11). Ditka’s statement may not be valid, as Spanier had been exonerated; yet lessons can be gleaned from this case study. It bears acknowledgment that “leadership processes and their outcomes are rarely the product of a single factor or person” (Thoroughgood, Sawyer, Padilla, & Lunsford, 2018, p. 628). However, each of the four leaders expressed some level of regret for not having done more to prevent child rapes from reoccurring. In 1998, Sandusky was told not to shower with children again and Sandusky said he “wouldn’t” (Freeh, 2012, p. 20). In 2001, the four leaders were apprised of a new situation where Sandusky did just that. This revealed that Sandusky did not adhere to the requirement and that there was a recurrence of potentially criminal behavior. Stern (2013) reminds crisis leaders of their significant roles. He repeats the slogan popularized during US President Harry Truman’s reign of office, “The Buck Stops Here” (p. 54), meaning that leaders are ultimately accountable in times of crises. Organizational leaders “have a responsibility to appropriately terminate crises and ensure that they and their organizations learn from – and change appropriately after – major events” (p. 54). During crises such as the one at Penn State, leaders typically experience greater ethical challenges than the average citizen. Ethical issues are implicitly or explicitly involved in any decision-making encounter (Northouse, 2013). The responses and decisions made by leaders in any given situation “are informed and directed by their ethics” (p. 424). Ethical leaders are responsible for attending to others, serving them, and making “decisions pertaining to them that are beneficial and not harmful to their welfare” (p. 432). Individual leaders in this case were widely perceived as acting in an ethically deficient manner when dealing with Sandusky (Langvardt, 2012). The decisions made after becoming apprised of Sandusky’s actions led to far-reaching, harmful consequences. Investigators found Shultz’s handwritten notes from May 4, 1998 regarding the Sandusky’s showering with an 11-year-old boy. Schultz wrote, “Is this opening of pandora’s [sic] box?” and “Other children?” (Freeh, 2012, p. 20). Thus, when another case arose in 2001, consciously or subconsciously, Shultz might have realized that this was a pattern of behavior. Yet, he decided to “play it by ear” about reporting to the Department of Welfare (p. 23). Spanier, to some degree, also knew that the 2001 decision had its shortcomings. He wrote to Curley and Schultz regarding the disciplinary plan of action, “The only downside for us is if the message isn’t ‘heard’ and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road” (Freeh, 2012, p. 24). Since Sandusky disregarded the earlier warning not to shower with children again, at some level, Spanier may have consciously or subconsciously believed that he would do the same this time. These two examples from Schultz and Spanier illustrate some element of doubt in their decision-making. Albino (2013) warns “when we doubt in our

Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned    65 hearts, we must stop and question” (p. 145). There seemed to be a contradiction between the decisions made and leaders’ personal beliefs. When contradictions occur, a leader “should focus on mission to bring such contradictions to the surface. Is there alignment between a person’s walk and his or her talk” (Terry, 1993, p. 97)? Powley and Taylor (2014) reveal that crisis leadership involves not only how the leader responds to the crisis but also who they are as persons. They also posit that leadership of this type is reflected in the construct of authentic leadership. Wagner (2013) believed that authentic leadership during the Penn State crisis was missing. He felt that “if leaders at Penn State had greater self-awareness and internalized moral perspective, they may have asked more questions about Sandusky’s conduct and the decision to suspend investigations of him” (p. 143). Serious reflection upon one’s decisions and their consequences, along with taking followers’ previous actions and reactions into account while doing so are vital lessons for individual leaders. There are issues that demand decisions in which the leader must recognize the signs that “this one is serious” (Albino, 2013, p. 143). Despite the seriousness of the events at Penn State, Spanier did not inform the Board of Trustees. Oroszi (2018) recognizes that the “ramification of sharing too much or not enough is a factor that weighs heavily on the crisis leader” (p. 338). Yet, in deciding what to divulge, it would have benefited Spanier to recognize that the Board of Trustees, whose overall mission is to govern the University, had the right to know of this crisis. Discerning these decisions wisely is crucial. Penn State is a complex organization. Undoubtedly, the top executives involved in this crisis routinely made wise decisions. Yet one lapse in crisis decision-making can adversely affect the leader, colleagues, followers, and a multitude of others for quite some time. Stern (2013) posits that assessment of crisis leadership effectiveness not only takes into account leader performance in the midst of the crisis but also to what degree the leader empowered and equipped followers prior to the crisis. Leader interaction with followers is a primary focus in the leader–member exchange theory (Northouse, 2013). Close relationships between the leader and the followers form in-groups, whereas the relationships of out-groups are quite formal and distant (p. 164). There is evidence of in-groups being formed between President Spanier and followers constituting Penn State’s upper management. Subordinates who are interested in negotiating with the leader what they are willing to do for the group can become part of the ingroup. The leader in turn, does more for these subordinates. (p. 163) Spanier’s organization benefited financially through the football program. In turn, those in leadership positions in the football program seemed to have been able to negotiate better than other departments. For example, when Sandusky retired, he received unprecedented benefits, such as a large lump-sum payment and emeritus status, which the Provost, Rodney Erickson, was uncomfortable with, “given Sandusky’s low academic rank and the precedent that would be set” (Freeh, 2012, p. 21). Erickson wrote his concerns in an email to Vice Provost, Robert Secor, while adding, “Let’s go ahead and grant it if Graham [Spanier] has already

66    Cheryl Patton promised it. We can hope that not too many others take that careful notice” (Petchesky, 2012). Some also perceived that Paterno enjoyed exceptional privileges regarding power. One of the janitors at the University told investigators, “I know Paterno has so much power that if he had wanted to get rid of someone, I would have been gone” (O’Neill, 2012, para. 22). Former Vice-President of Student Affairs, Vicky Triponey echoed that sentiment, positing that Paterno wielded power over the administration (Johnson & Marklein, 2012). Lessons learned in this regard underscore the importance of leader assessment of their relationships with followers. In-groups form through special relationships with certain individuals. It would behoove leaders to attempt to “improve their work unit by building strong leader–member exchanges with all their subordinates” rather than giving undue power to a select few (Northouse, 2013, p. 172). Crisis leadership evaluation also focuses on “organizational culture before, during, and after crises” (Gilstrap et al., 2016, p. 2790). At this broader level, the culture of Penn State seemed in need of alterations, according to Freeh (2012). Cultural change is possible for top leaders to attain but difficult at any size organization, yet quite arduous at very large organizations (Alvesson & Sveningsson, 2008). It would be quite a task, therefore, for Penn State to undergo cultural change due to its size. Freeh’s report (2012) concluded that in addition to individual failings, weaknesses in culture were evident. It called for “open, honest, and thorough examination of the culture that underlies the failure of Penn State’s most powerful leaders to respond appropriately to Sandusky’s crimes” (p. 128). Freeh mentioned the “culture of reverence” (p. 17) for football and its “resistance to seeking outside perspectives” at the University and though also lauding some aspects of the school’s culture, “such as its collegiality, high standards of educational excellence and research, and respect for the environment” (p. 129). A lesson learned at the organizational level involves periodic assessment of workplace culture. Leaders must honestly evaluate if the culture places excessive reverence on certain areas of the organization, which can inadvertently lead to protecting that area at all cost to avoid negative publicity and retain its esteem. Another lesson for organizational leaders is to assess for cultures of complicity, where misconduct or malpractice is ignored to protect the organization, its interests, or its members. The fact that the janitorial staff members were afraid to come forward with what they saw for fear of retaliation is one example of such a culture. Leaders must work diligently to create “a ‘speak up culture’ where people are trained and encouraged” to spot misconduct or objectionable behaviors and to feel comfortable to report them if they are recognized (Goonrey & Scandrett, 2018, para. 6). Reporting crimes on higher educational campuses that participate in federal student aid programs, as well as compiling “an annual report on campus safety, complete with crime statistics and information on safety procedures” are requirements of the federal campus safety law named the Clery Act (McDermott, 2012, para. 3). This law, passed in 1990, has undergone several amendments. It requires universities “to keep track of certain types of crimes, including sexual assaults, and publicize alerts regarding any incidents that might pose a threat to the community” (para. 3). Had the Clery Act been strictly adhered to, Sandusky’s crimes

Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned    67 would have been brought to light much sooner. In 2016, after a five-year investigation, the U.S. Department of Education fined Penn State “nearly $2.4 million for failing to comply with federal crime disclosure laws” (New, 2016, para. 2). The U.S. Department of Education (2016) identified 11 findings in its report, the first citing that the University “failed to properly record the reported forcible sex offense committed against a minor child by Sandusky in the shower room of the Lasch Building” (p. 19). The report also named the “football culture” at the University as contributing to “numerous instances where cultural and climate factors in the football program adversely affected campus safety operations, primarily involving the student conduct process” (p. 10). One such incident occurred in 2009 when a football player, accused of “a serious sex crime” was called to the student conduct office to discuss the allegations. The player’s first question was “Does football know I’m here (p. 14)?” Furthermore, Penn State was found lax in prioritizing the culture of safety by failing to commit resources to Clery Act compliance and overall safety, despite being “well-funded” with an annual budget of over “$4.3 billion” at the time of the investigation (p. 8). At the organizational level, a culture of safety must remain a top priority. Organizational leaders have the duty of keeping employees apprised of federal, state, and local statutes that apply to their professional roles. At Penn State, most employees had “never heard of the Clery Act” at the time of Freeh’s (2012, p. 17) Report. Once educated in their roles, employees must adhere to the organization’s legal responsibilities. Organizational culture must reflect its determination to abide by these laws by instituting zero tolerance policies for offenders at all levels of the organization, without any attempts to bend the rules for certain employers or groups.

Conclusion The demands of performing leadership duties are many. Making an organization run efficiently and smoothly is merely one aspect. Wise decision-making, particularly during times of crisis, also plays a major role in leadership. When crises occur that may result in negative publicity, it may be tempting to make decisions that keep the organization in a favorable light. However, such decision-making can result in ethical lapses, or what could be interpreted as unethical behaviors. It also creates greater damage than seeking immediate, long-term solutions to the problem. Repercussions of inaction are far-reaching. Though the public may never discover the exact breadth of what was known to the University leaders regarding the serial abuse caused by Jerry Sandusky, it is clear that swifter and more appropriate interventions would have saved multiple children from harm.

References Albino, J. (2013). Personal leadership identity and leadership frames: Understanding what happened at Penn State. The Psychologist‐Manager Journal, 16(3), 131–146.

68    Cheryl Patton Alvesson, M., & Sveningsson, S. (2008). Changing organizational culture: Cultural change work in progress. New York, NY: Routledge. Andone, D., & Sanchez, R. (2019). Jerry Sandusky resentenced to same prison term. CNN. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/22/us/jerry-sandusky-sentencing/ index.html Chappell, B. (2012). Penn State abuse scandal: A guide and timeline. NPR. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2011/11/08/142111804/penn-state-abuse-scandal-a-guide-and-timeline Couloumbis, A., Snyder, S., & Roebuck, J. (2017). Sandusky case stunner: Ex-Penn State officials plead guilty, Spanier to face trial alone. The Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved from https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/Penn-State-spanier-trial-plea-deal.html Curry, C. (2011). Former FBI director Louis Freeh to head latest Penn State probe. ABC News. Retrieved from https://abcnews.go.com/US/penn-state-hires-fbi-directorlouis-freeh-investigate/story?id=14999351 Dauphin County Court Reporters. (2012). Preliminary hearing [transcript proceedings, Vol.  1]. Retrieved from http://media.pennlive.com/midstate_impact/other/CurleySchultz-Hearing-Transcript.pdf Domonoske, C. (2017). 3 ex-Penn State officials get jail time for failure to report Sandusky abuse. NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ 2017/06/02/531243225/3-penn-state-officials-sentenced-to-jail-time-for-failure-toreport-sandusky Falce, L. (2017). Curley, Shultz begin jail sentences; Spanier plays the washboard at Arts Fest. Centre Daily Times. Retrieved from https://www.centredaily.com/news/local/ education/penn-state/jerry-sandusky/article161561928.html Freeh, L. (2012). Report of the special investigative counsel regarding the actions of The Pennsylvania State University related to the child sexual abuse committed by Gerald A. Sandusky. Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP. Retrieved from http://www.bishopaccountability.org/reports/2012_07_12_Freeh_Penn_State_Report.pdf Gilstrap, C. A., Gilstrap, C. M., Holderby, K. N., & Valera, K. M. (2016). Sensegiving, leadership, and nonprofit crises: How nonprofit leaders make and give sense to organizational crisis. Voluntas, 27(6), 2787–2806. Goonrey, A., & Scandrett, L. (2018). Workplace culture: Complicity vs. speaking out. HRM. Retrieved from https://www.hrmonline.com.au/section/featured/workplaceculture-complicity-vs-speaking/ Hobson, W. (2017). Former Penn State President Graham Spanier sentenced to jail for child endangerment in Jerry Sandusky abuse case. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2017/06/02/former-penn-statepresident-graham-spanier-sentenced-to-jail-for-child-endangerment-in-jerry-­ sandusky-abuse-case/?noredirect=on Isikoff, M. (2012). Former Penn State President Graham Spanier charged in child sex abuse scandal. NBC News. Retrieved from http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_ news/2012/11/01/14852918-former-penn-state-president-graham-spanier-chargedin-child-sex-abuse-scandal Johnson, J. (2012). Sandusky sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/jerry-sanduskysentenced-to-30-to-60-years-in-prison/2012/10/09/6d5ed134-1184-11e2-ba83a7a396e6b2a7_story.html Johnson, K., & Marklein, M. B. (2012). Freeh report blasts culture of Penn State. USA Today. Retrieved from http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-07-12/ louis-freeh-report-penn-state-jerry-sandusky/56181956/1 Kiner, D. (2018). Penn State football coach fired on this day in 2011. Penn Live. Retrieved from https://www.pennlive.com/life/2018/11/penn-state-football-coach-joe-paternofired-on-this-day-in-2011.html

Campus in Crisis: Leadership Lessons Learned    69 Langvardt, A. W. (2012). Ethical leadership and the dual roles of examples. Business Horizons, 55(4), 373–384. Layden, T. (2012). Joe Paterno 1926–2012. SI Vault. Retrieved from https:// vault.si.com/ vault/2012/01/30/joe-paterno-19262012 McDermott, C. (2012). Investigators say Clery Act compliance at Penn State fell short. The Daily Collegian. Retrieved from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archives/ article_6ebb868a-7627-55bc-bfc5-8790d3e30d13.html McNulty, E. J., Marcus, L. J., & Henderson, J. M. (2019). Every leader a crisis leader? Prepare to lead when it matters most. Leader to Leader, 94, 33–38. Moushey, B., & Dvorshak, B. (2012). Game over. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers. New, J. (2016). Historic fine for Penn State. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www. insidehighered.com/news/2016/11/04/education-departments-historic-sanctionagainst-penn-state-clery-violations Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. O’Neill, A. (2012). The woman who stood up to Joe Paterno. CNN. Retrieved from https:// www.cnn.com/2012/07/15/us/triponey-paterno-penn-state/index.html Oroszi, T. (2018). A preliminary analysis of high-stakes decision-making for crisis leadership. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning, 11(4), 335–359. Petchesky, B. (2012). When current PSU President Rodney Erickson bent the rules for Jerry Sandusky. Deadspin. Retrieved from http://deadspin.com/5925561/when-currentpenn-state-president-rodney-erickson-bent-the-rules-for-jerry-sandusky Peterson, A. (2016). Latest audit: Penn State paid $93 million to 33 Sandusky accusers. ABC 27 News. Retrieved from https://www.abc27.com/news/latest-audit-penn-statepaid-93m-to-33-sandusky-accusers/ Powley, E. H., & Taylor, S. N. (2014). Pedagogical approaches to develop critical thinking and crisis leadership. Journal of Management Education, 38(4), 560–585. Rushton, G. (2016). Perjury charge against former Penn State AD Curley officially dismissed. Retrieved from http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/perjurycharge-against-former-penn-state-ad-curley-officially-dismissed,1469531/ Rushton, G. (2020). Judge denies Sandusky request for reduced sentencing. Retrieved from https://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/judge-denies-sandusky-request-forreduced-sentencing,1482360/ Scolforo, M. (2017). Paterno family drops lawsuit against NCAA over Freeh Report. AP News. Retrieved from https://www.apnews.com/ae26e4d9dc4d4f2c85ebaa2bf 4f6ec04 Simpson, I. (2016). Penn State’s Paterno knew of Sandusky abuse in 1976: Deposition. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pennsylvania-sandusky/ penn-states-paterno-knew-of-sandusky-abuse-in-1976-deposition-idUSKCN0ZS2EO Slotkin, J. (2017). Ex-Penn State president guilty of child endangerment in abuse scandal. NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/ 03/24/521427407/ex-penn-state-president-guilty-of-child-endangerment-in-abusescandal Stern, E. (2013). Preparing: The sixth task of crisis leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(3), 51–56. Terry, R. W. (1993). Authentic leadership: Courage in action. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Thoroughgood, C. N., Sawyer, K. B., Padilla, A., & Lunsford, L. (2018). Destructive leadership: A critique of leader-centric perspectives and toward a more holistic definition. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(3), 627–649. U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Final program review determination. Federal Student Aid Office. Retrieved from https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/default/files/ fsawg/datacenter/cleryact/pennstate/PSCFPRD10327991.pdf

70    Cheryl Patton Viera, M. (2011). Paterno is finished at Penn State, and President is out. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/sports/ncaafootball/joe-paterno-and-graham-spanier-out-at-penn-state.html?_r=0 Vigna, P. (2019). Penn State confirms new claim of sexual assault by Jerry Sandusky. Penn Live Patriot News. Retrieved from https://www.pennlive.com/news/2019/10/penn-stateconfirms-new-claim-of-sexual-assault-by-jerry-sandusky.html Wagner, S. H. (2013). Leadership and responses to organizational crisis. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(2), 140–144. Witz, B. (2019). Judge overturns conviction of ex-Penn State president in Sandusky case. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/sports/ penn-state-spanier-sandusky.html

Chapter 7

Ethics, Leadership and the Dreaded Performance Appraisal Lonnie R. Morris Abstract This chapter explores leadership failure by way of performance appraisal. A series of experiences in two different organizations with two different managers is examined through the lens of four critical performance appraisal mistakes – lack of objectivism (assessment based upon own experiences, beliefs and expectations), freshness (relying on recent events with little consideration for past behavior), causal attribution (flawed interpretation of employee behavior) and first impression (assessment based upon something learned from early introduction to employee, often the first encounter) These mistakes represent a continuum of infractions for which ethical leadership is offered as an antidote. Ethical leadership strategies are provided to support employees, managers, teams, and organizations in counteracting, avoiding, surviving and eliminating these mistakes, ­respectively. Keywords: Ethical leadership; performance appraisal mistakes; objectivism; freshness; causal attribution; first impression

Introduction Performance appraisal is an important leadership responsibility. It involves evaluating employee performance, providing feedback on areas of competence and assessing goal achievement. While scholars and professionals encourage regular, ongoing feedback as best practice (Longenecker & Ludwig, 1990), this is not always the adopted leadership stance. In many cases, leaders regulate performance appraisals to a single, annual conversation. It’s frightening to consider this as a one-time transaction because so much hangs in the balance. When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 71–80 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211007

72    Lonnie R. Morris Employee perceptions of the organization and its leadership are informed by these experiences. Bad ones, or performance appraisal leadership failures, can lead employees to question trust (Belsito & Reutzel, 2019), fairness (Goksoy & Alayoglu, 2013), and justice (Jacobs, Belschak, & den Hartog, 2014) throughout the organization. It is an area of concern for employees and managers alike (Axline, 1996). While there are many performance appraisal mistakes that contribute to leadership failures, this chapter describes experiences with four that particularly challenge the ethics of leadership and organization structures – lack of objectivism (assessment based upon own experiences, beliefs and expectations), freshness (relying on recent events with little consideration for past behavior), causal attribution (flawed interpretation of employee behavior) and first impression (assessment based upon something learned from early introduction to employee, often the first encounter) (Misiak, 2010). I encountered these mistakes in two separate organizations with two different managers. However, the collective impact represents a continuum of leadership failures that necessitate individuals and organizations evaluate the need for appropriate action, communication, reinforcement and decision-making, otherwise known as ethical leadership (Brown, Trevino, & Harrison, 2005), in the performance appraisal process.

Background Small College USA Small College USA was a quaint organization with rich history. Like many organization its size, it boasted a close-knit community with a family-like setting. The organizational culture was shaped by a combination of southern hospitality, religious affiliation, and dominant ethnic influence. Over the years, Small College USA experienced several ups and downs including challenges with customer satisfaction, revenue, profitability, and general resources. But Small College USA was resilient. Despite multiple presidents, high turnover in executive and administrate staff, student attrition, and a few run-ins with government watchdogs, it always emerged bruised, but not defeated. I joined a critical unit responsible for a large portion of organization revenue and new enrollment development. The senior and mid-level managers in my unit worked well together. We shared a collective understanding of the fragility of organization. We knew organizational success hinged on our ability to work collaboratively. We didn’t always agree, but we were agreeable. I was calm heading into my Small College USA performance appraisal described here, just as in previous years. I followed my normal routine – completed the self-evaluation, identified strengths, acknowledged areas of development and compiled supporting evidence. My evaluating manager worked at the organization for several years, but was only five months into his current role. I had more strategic and functional experience in this area than he, but that didn’t seem to impact our positive working relationship.

Ethics, Leadership and the Dreaded Performance Appraisal   73 Medium College USA Medium College USA also touted a close-knit, family-like setting. It was nestled in suburbia with strong metropolitan influences. The organizational history was more steadfast with long standing, experienced executive leaders and consistent growth in revenue, customers and regional reputation. In joining Medium College USA, I expanded my portfolio to three additional operational units. Later, I also absorbed a fourth. The first three years were pleasant. We made reasonable progress in most areas. Some metrics moved more significantly than others, but all trends were positive. I enjoyed a congenial, hands-off relationship with my up-line managers. I developed strong relationships with fellow directors and senior level managers across the organization. Year four was challenging. Several environmental, industry and internal factors halted the success we experienced the three years prior. The industry hit a stonewall. An organizational tragedy spawned a public relations nightmare. Our division’s senior executive retired. Our operational units were plagued with multiple employee interpersonal challenges. In the end, we fell short of revenue and enrollment targets. A twice-retired, industry professional joined the organization as the interim senior executive for our division while a yearlong, national search for a permanent successor ensued. She joined just as we were absorbing the effects of a less than successful cycle. The damage was already done upon her arrival; We were already well into the new chapter. We discussed the previous challenges. I assured her we were making the appropriate adjustments across the unit. We regularly communicated about progress. She was still the interim when annual performance appraisals rolled around. I approached this season as I had all the previous – self-aware and confident, armed with data. By performance appraisal season, we were well on target to meet or surpass our goals for the year.

A Spectacle of Performance Appraisal Mistakes Mistake #1: Lack of Objectivism Leaders commit lack of objectivism mistakes when they base performance appraisals on their own experiences, beliefs and expectations (Misiak, 2010). My Small College USA performance appraisal meeting began with my manager explaining that although he understood the organizational rating scale ranged from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest), he never gave a score of 5 to anyone for any reason. It was a practice informed by his experiences elsewhere and his beliefs about the process. He didn’t offer any offsetting accommodation to align with the larger organizational process. He didn’t explain if he’d shared his approach with his boss or human resources. He just stood proudly in the subjective moment waiting for my response. I chuckled. I heard stories of this happening to others, but never encountered it first-hand until this moment. Then I flashed a half smile to indicate I understood his position. We continued.

74    Lonnie R. Morris Mistake #2: Freshness Leaders commit freshness mistakes when they base performance appraisals on recent events without consideration for prior performance and achievements (Misiak, 2010). This became apparent when we reached the assessment of teamwork. His rating stunned me – 2, below average. No laughing this time. I was perplexed. He justified his rating with a single event. In a recent director’s meeting I declined to help alphabetize a stack of index cards. From that incident he branded me as not a team player. To be fair, I most certainly declined to help. I spent the two hours leading up to that meeting crunching numbers, running reports, and analyzing statistics that were critical for collective decision-making. I spent the hour before that helping two other directors reconcile their data so we could get accurate reports. In the end we could not fully reconcile data because one director had not yet entered information into our system. The data we needed was sitting before us in a stack of unsorted, un-alphabetized index cards. In a moment of frustration and exhaustion, I politely declined the invitation to help with such a task. Excluding the index-card debacle, my teamwork record for the year was strong. I initiated the transfer of two mission-critical processes into my department from areas that didn’t have capacity to manage them. Our president appointed me to chair an organization-wide task force with critical revenue-facing objectives. The director of information technology gave me full access to all modules in our division to assist other units with critical tasks. My manager’s appraisal ignored all my teamwork-based initiatives and achievements.

Mistake #3: Causal Attribution Leaders commit causal attribution mistakes when they base an overall appraisal on misinterpretation or mischaracterization of employee behavior (Misiak, 2010). This mistake was the foundation for my appraisal at Medium College USA. My manager prefaced our performance appraisal meeting with an email the night before that contained the full written appraisal and a warning of sorts – “the current ratings are not negotiable.” The document included a series of half-truths, exaggerations and other perversions of my work, my character, my unit’s achievements and my interactions with her. It was the most egregious workplace account I ever read. The falsehoods carried through every assessment area. While she established no standing meetings or reporting structure, she described my interaction with her as ambiguous and vague. She alleged receiving “complaints from several constituencies” about my work and communication, but provided neither context about the nature nor source of the grievances. The written performance appraisal read like a new storyline from the mischievous mind of a best-selling fiction author. It was fiction indeed. When we met the following day she admitted pre-empting our chat with “ratings are not negotiable” because she was sure I would be angry and subsequently refuse to sign the written document.

Ethics, Leadership and the Dreaded Performance Appraisal   75 Mistake #4: First Impression Leaders commit first impression mistakes when they base the overall performance appraisal on information and/or experiences from an early and often first encounter with the employee (Misiak, 2010). Her condemnation continued in this vein. She chastised my work as mere “basic level of performance” citing shortfalls in revenue and enrollment targets from the previous year. The performance cycle she referenced actually concluded as she began her role as interim. She made no mention of the nine months of progress since then. On the date of this meeting, our performance metrics showed improvements across all areas in my portfolio ranging from 7.5% to 64%. Following a national conference presentation about our turnaround, three peer organizations sent teams to observe our operation. Impressed by our results, a national industry group invited my leadership team to host an upcoming biannual conference. None of that was captured in her appraisal. She focused solely on the state of affairs upon her arrival.

What Ethical Leadership Teaches Us about Performance Appraisal The experiences described here are consistent with performance appraisal mistakes documented by researchers and practitioners. These are typical ethical infractions that lead to leadership failures. We must acknowledge performance appraisal as a critical leadership function with ethical implications for employee well-being (Kalshoven & Boon, 2012), organizational climate (Sabiu, Kura, Mei, Raihan Joarder, & Umrani, 2019) and workplace infrastructure (Jacobs et al., 2014). Framing performance appraisal experiences with an ethical leadership lens helps us pinpoint areas for individual, group and organizational growth. Successful performance appraisal management requires an ethical orientation in leader action, communication and decision-making (Axline, 1996). Integrity, fairness, trust and justice are universal, ethical expectations of the performance appraisal experience expressed by managers and employees (Dusterhoff, Cunningham, & MacGregor, 2014; Garden, Hu, Zhan, & Wei, 2018; Goksoy & Alayoglu, 2013; Mo & Shi, 2017; Rosen, Kacmar, Harris, Gavin, & Hochwater, 2017). An ethical orientation pairs well with performance appraisals because the behavioral standards named in the workforce are consistently identified as core tenets of ethical leadership across contexts – as a general approach (Brown, Trevino, & Harrison, 2005), at work (Kalshoven, Den Hartog, & De Hoogh, 2011), in universities (Rathore & Singh, 2018), online (Morris, Thomas, Bolton, & Sippio, 2017) and particularly between supervisors and employees (Yukl, Mahsud, & Prussia, 2013).

Employees Practice ethical leadership even when it is not modeled. Ethical leaders welcome positive and critical input from others (Kalshoven et al., 2011; Yukl et al., 2013). When confronted with the freshness mistake (leader reliance on recent events

76    Lonnie R. Morris without consideration for prior performance and achievements) at Small College USA, I listened to better understand the real concern. Even though we never discussed the incident, I knew my response was not well received. The freshness mistake also helped me realize how my actions impacted my manager. It was so significant to him that it overshadowed all my other teamwork accomplishments. Ethical leaders show respect for others. Internalizing this principle can help regulate immediate emotional responses to performance appraisal mistakes. Practice keeping your composure, asking questions and seeking clarity. The resilience you develop will help you when your manager begins disclosing negative feelings and attitudes about your work for the first time (as I experienced at Medium College USA). With practice it may not trigger a response that can be perceived as disrespectful. When applied properly, ethical leadership helped police officers (Jacobs et al., 2014), retail workers, pharmaceutical employees (Mo & Shi, 2017) and educators (Yariv, 2009) mitigate in the moment negative attitudes and reactions. Although I felt a sense of injustice, I remained calm in both performance appraisal meetings. I gave each manager the respect attributed to the position. The day following each meeting, I respectfully submitted rebuttal memos to human resources and their respective supervisors.

Managers Ethical leaders establish clear expectations. Both organizations had formal performance appraisal processes which typically supported clear expectations and strong communication toward that end (Belsito & Reutzel, 2019). Leverage process formality to regularly articulate standards (Longenecker & Ludwig, 1990) and to consider organizational costs and benefits of your actions (Rosen et al., 2017) as you would with any other strategic process. Communicate praise and concerns often. Privately unpack employee comments and actions when necessary. Failure to establish clear expectations was a partial catalyst for all four performance appraisal mistakes described here. The manager at Small College USA never shared his philosophy of evaluating employee performance or how his position fit into the larger organizational context. It was never clear how the redacted scale affected other organizational processes such as merit pay increases triggered by performance appraisal scores. The manager at Medium College USA never shared her concerns regarding communication or performance beyond our dashboard metrics. Without indication otherwise, I gauged progress and success by the traditional standards. Ethical leaders are consistent in actions and words. Share your concerns openly and honestly. Reinforce those concerns with regular temperature checks. Provide resources to support employee success. Alignment of actions and words leading up to and during the performance appraisal is an indicator the process has meaning and utility for managers and employees (Belsito & Reutzel, 2019; Rosen et al., 2017). The Medium College USA manager never expressed concerns about our progress or recommended I consider any behavior adjustments. Leading up to the performance appraisal she presented as supportive with a hands-off style that falsely communicated empowerment and autonomy.

Ethics, Leadership and the Dreaded Performance Appraisal   77 Research shows causal attribution mistakes (flawed interpretation of employee behavior and actions) emanate from frustration leaders feel toward employees they deem low performers. Similar to this case, the leaders often withdraw from those employees (Dusterhoff et al., 2014) and rarely acknowledge their own role in the negative outcome (Yariv, 2009). An alternative to manager condemnation of employees is manager accountability for actions or inactions that lead to an undesirable outcome.

Groups and Teams An ethical leadership approach to performance appraisals promotes care and support for the entire team. As leaders practice engaging in regular discourse, showing respect for co-workers and subordinates, communicating clear expectations, and aligning their words and actions, employees experience increased sense of belongingness and well-being (Kalshoven & Boon, 2012). Subsequently, employees engage at higher, ethical levels as well. They are more likely to take intiative on office tasks, assist co-workers with critical projects, and collaborate widely to support desired team, unit and organizational outcomes (Rosen et al., 2017). When ethical leadership is not standard performance appraisal behavior, like with Small and Medium College USA, employees can shift in the opposite direction. Consistent with employees in similar situations (e.g., Dusterhoff et al., 2014; Goksoy & Alayoglu, 2013), these performance appraisal mistakes triggered my own frustration, anger and confusion. I continued to meet daily responsibilities and engage in a collegial manner, but was less inclined to initiate tasks, absorb work from co-workers, or exert extra effort. It was the same workplace impression management researchers typically identify with performance appraisals (Liu, Loi, & Lam, 2013; Mo & Shi, 2017). It was hard to internally reconcile continued ethical, helping behaviors (Jacobs et al., 2014) with the injustice I experienced with the performance appraisal.

Organizations Ethical guidance for performance appraisals is an organizational responsibility for which senior leaders and human resources professionals are accountable. Employee perception of organizational fairness and justice is directly tied, in part, to performance appraisal content and process (Goksoy & Alayoglu, 2013; Jacobs et al., 2014; Kalshoven & Boon, 2012). Organizations are responsible for developing managers to properly supervise, coach and assess employees while managing their own biases, beliefs and assumptions (Neck, Stewart, & Manz, 1995). Teach managers to recognize and avoid performance appraisal mistakes. Establish systems for ongoing employee feedback. Reinforce proper performance appraisal execution. Reward performance appraisal practices that demonstrate consistent fair treatment. In the absence of explicit ethical guidance, leaders improvise (e.g., Trevino, Brown, & Hartman, 2003). Lack of objectivism, freshness, causal attribution and first impression mistakes occur in this gap. The gap was everpresent at Small and Medium College USA. At the time of both performance appraisals,

78    Lonnie R. Morris I was also a manager supervising multiple units and a few dozen employees. The performance appraisal guidance I recall was procedural – adhere to these deadlines, gather these signatures, submit through this portal. The processes lacked discussions about proper employee evaluation, appropriate feedback strategies, navigating difficult conversations and coaching employees for success. Both organizations treated performance appraislals as managerial means to organizational ends (Longenecker & Ludwig, 1990). Audit performance appraisals to ensure organizational integrity. Performance appraisal mistakes contribute to institutional gatekeeping. Managers report employee performance using selective language to combine details in ways that convey potentially self-serving narratives (Rosen et al., 2017; Van De Mieroop & Schnurr, 2014). This came to pass at Medium College USA. My unit surpassed customer and revevue targets. Then, as we began preparing for the next cycle, I was terminated. In my separation meeting, the division vice president conceded my manager wanted to hire her own person. Neither the vice president or human resources director responded to my memo refuting the manager’s heinouos performance appraisal months earlier. Yet with my termination they offered me an endoresement letter and employment reference. I declined both. I experienced this moment as the epitome of unfairness (Goksoy & Alayoglu, 2013), injustice (Jacobs et al., 2014), manipulation (Longenecker & Ludwig, 1990) and dissatisfaction (Dusterhoff et al., 2014) too often associated with performance appraisals. All hints of organizational integrity at Medium College USA shattered in that moment.

Conclusion Performance appraisal mistakes can have positive and negative lasting effects. Both were true of my experiences. As an employee I developed a sense of distrust for the culprit managers, the organizational process, and to some deegree, performance appraisals in general. Both relationships became strained; I communicated with them as needed. Conversely, the experiences strengthened my ethical leadership resolve as a manager. Over the years, acute awareness of such issues informed my intentional modeling of behaviors that communicate care, support, respect, fairness, integrity and justice. I strive to be the example my previous managers needed and my current co-workers and employees deserve.

References Axline, L. L. (1996). Viewpoints: The ethics of performance appraisal. S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal, 61(1), 44. Belsito, C. A., & Reutzel, C. R. (2019). SME employee performance appraisal formalization and trust in leadership change. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 28(2), 434–456. doi:http://dx.doi.org.tcsedsystem.idm.oclc.org/10.1108/IJOA07-2019-1832

Ethics, Leadership and the Dreaded Performance Appraisal   79 Brown, M. E., Trevino, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behaviot and Human Decision Processes, 97, 117–134. Dusterhoff, C., Cunningham, J., & MacGregor, J. (2014). The effects of performance rating, leader-member exchange, perceived utility and organizational justice on performance appraisal satisfaction: Applying a moral judgment perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(2), 265–273. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1634-1 Garden, R., Hu, X., Zhan, Y., & Wei, F. (2018). The role of workplace popularity: Links to employee characteristics and supervisor-rated outcomes. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 25(1), 19–29. doi:10.1777/1548051817712876 Goksoy, A., & Alayoglu, N. (2013). The impact of perception of performance appraisal and distributive justice fairness on employees’ ethical decision making in paternalist organizational culture. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(1), 57–79. doi:10.1002/piq.21137 Jacobs, G., Belschak, F. D., & den Hartog, D. N. (2014). (Un)ethical behavior and performance appraisal role of affect, support and organizational justice. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), 63–76. Kalshoven, K., & Boon, C. T. (2012). Ethical leadership, employee well-being and helping: The moderating role of human resource management. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 11(1), 60–68. doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000056 Kalshoven, K., Den Hartog, D. N., & De Hoogh, A. H. (2011). Ethical leadership at work questionnaire (ELW): Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 51–69. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.12.007 Liu, Y., Loi, R., & Lam, L. M. (2013). Exemplification and supervisor-rated performance: The moderating role of ethical leadership. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 21(2), 145–154. doi:10.1111/ijsa.12025 Longenecker, C., & Ludwig, D. (1990). Ethical dilemmas in performance appraisal revisited. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(12), 961–969. Misiak, S. (2010). Ethical system for employee performance appraisal in practice. Economics & Sociology, 3(2), 101–113. doi:10.14254/2071-789x.2010/3-2/11 Mo, S., & Shi, J. (2017). Linking ethical leadership to employee burnout, workplace deviance and performance: Testing the mediating roles of trust in leader surface acting. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(2), 293–303. doi:http://dx.doi.org.tcsedsystem.oclc. org/10.1007/s10551-015-2821-z Morris, L. R., Thomas, T., Sippio, D., & Bolton, D. (2017). An ethical leader’s guide to social media: Prelude to a framework for leader ethical digital identity. Proceedings of the International Center for Global Leadership, Belize, 5, 32–39. Neck, C. P., & Stewart, G. L., & Manz, C. C. (1995). Thought self-leadership as a framework for enhancing the performance of performance appraisers. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 31(3), 278–302. Rathore, N., & Singh, A. (2018). Determinants and outcomes of ethical leadership in unversities: A scale development. International Journal of Leadership, 6(1), 7–18. Rosen, C., Kacmar, K., Harris, K., Gavin, M., & Hochwarter, W. (2017). Workplace politics and performance appraisal. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(1), 20–38. doi:10.1177/1548051816661480 Sabiu, M. S., Kura, K. M., Mei, T. S., Raihan Joarder, M. H., & Umrani, W. A. (2019). The mediating role of ethical climate in the relationship between performance appraisal and organizational performance. International Journa of Public Administration, 42(8), 843–853. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2018.1498105 Trevino, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human Relations, 56(1), 5–37.

80    Lonnie R. Morris Van De Mieroop, D., & Schnurr, S. (2014). Negotiating meaning and co-constructing institutionalisable answers: Leadership through gate-keeping in performance appraisal interviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 67, 1–16. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2014.03.008 Yariv, E. (2009). The appraisal of teachers’ performance and its impact on the mutuality of principal-teacher emotions. School Leadership & Managemetn, 29(5), 445–461. doi:10.1080/13632430903152302 Yukl, G., Mahsud, R., & Prussia, G. E. (2013). An improved measure of ethical leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 20(1), 8–38.

Chapter 8

Autocratic Leadership among Managers and Its Impact on Salespersons Behavior in India’s Pharmaceutical Industry G. Arun and C. G. Manoj Krishnan Abstract If any organization wants to be globally recognized leadership plays an important role. This chapter deals with the leadership failure in creating good salesperson behavior in India’s pharmaceutical industry. There are four types of salesperson’s behavior: selling orientation, customer orientation, adaptive selling, and unethical selling. Selling oriented and unethical selling behaviors negatively impact customer trust and customer value, while customer orientation and adaptive are more positive. This chapter explores how senior managers can create good organization culture and organization climate by creating positive sales behavior. This chapter will be an eye opener to many first-line managers for helping their salespersons to practice customer orientation and adaptive selling behavior. Keywords: Customer orientation; customer trust; customer value organizational culture; selling orientation; unethical selling

Introduction A leader should have a vision, purpose, values and honesty; a good leader should be motivator to the employees. A good leader should motivate his employees to provide excellent service to the customers (Beer, 2001, p. 233). If any organization wants to globally recognized in this highly competitive world authentic leadership is important (Luthans & Avolio, 2003, p. 246). There should be an authentic relationship between managers and sales executive for keeping them motivated in the job (Seligman 2002, p. 1). If you look at the Pharmaceutical Industry in When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 81–90 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211008

82    G. Arun and C. G. Manoj Krishnan India, the companies use personnel selling as the main marketing strategy to sell their medicines. A pharmaceutical company operating all over India, they deploy one or two or more medical representatives (salesperson) to sell their product in a district. Then there will be an Area Sales Manager taking care of two to three districts and there will be a Regional Sales Manager taking care of the State and for a zone (e.g., Southern states of India) there will be a Zonal Manager reporting to VP Sales and CEO. This is the whole structure of a Pharmaceutical Company.

Definition Selling‐oriented behavior among salesperson is defined as the selling technique that the salesperson will try to convince the customer using pressurizing selling tactics without understanding the needs and wants of the customer by painting a rosy picture about the product (Saxe & Weitz, 1982, p. 346). Customer‐oriented behavior among salesperson is defined as the selling technique that identify and cater to the needs and wants of the customers for solving their problems (Schwepker, 2003, p. 151). Adaptive selling behavior among the salesperson is defined as the selling technique is the ability of a salesperson to change his sales behavior while interacting with customers, or based on perceived information about the nature of sales situations, such as correcting communication styles, content and sales behaviors (Weitz, 1981, p. 86). Unethical selling behavior is defined as the selling technique that practiced by the salesperson to convince the customers with lie, misrepresentation and fraudulence to close the sale (Bellizzi & Hite, 1989, p. 39).

Leadership Failure Factor I was reporting to Area Sales Manager as a Medical Sales Representative at the time when I was working with Pharmaceutical company. Area Sales Manager used to put lot of pressure on Medical Sales representative (Executives) for achieving the sales target which is a bit unrealistic. This was not only in my case, it is with everyone in the company. I am not saying that target is a nightmare to Medical Sales Representative; my view is that target should be realistic. If we work hard it should be achievable. The company is setting goals which are hard to achieve will put pressure on Zonal Sales Manager to Regional Manager to Areas Sales Manager and the final ring in the chain is the Medical Sales Representatives. If there is too much sales pressure, the Medical Sales Representatives/Salesperson will practice selling orientation and unethical selling behavior rather than practicing customeroriented and adaptive selling behavior. In my previous researches and many other researches; it is noted that selling-oriented behavior and unethical selling behavior is having a negative impact on customer trust and customer value. The salesperson who practices customer oriented and adaptive selling behavior has a positive impact on customer trust and customer value. If a salesperson want to practice customer-oriented behavior or adaptive selling behavior, a great motivation and support from the top management, managers especially from Area Sales Manager

Autocratic Leadership among Managers    83 is important. If a company has an over pressurized selling strategy, the salespersons will surely practice selling oriented and unethical selling behavior will create a negative attitude in the mind of customers during a long run. This is a big leadership failure, I witnessed in the pharmaceutical company I worked with. Ninety-nine percent of the pharma company strategy is the same. If the CEO wants the company to over pressurize the managers and salespersons, it will lead to a negative organization climate and culture. It will not be creating happiness at work and organizational citizenship behavior among medical representatives/salespersons. An authentic happiness at work is really important to create positive psychology among salespersons, which leads to positive outcomes in salespersons behaviour and performance (Seligman 2002, p. 1). I worked as a medical sales representative from May 2006 to June 2008. Our company was newly launched. I was from the beginning of the company. The company’s headquarter was in Ahmedabad and I was in charge of the capital city of Kerala, that is, Trivandrum. I was in charge of the entire district Trivandrum. Our company was promoting products in cardiac–diabetic segment. When I started working for the company, the day 1 itself from my Area Sales Manager and the Induction Training Team, I came to know that there is a hectic cut throat competition in the cardiac–diabetic section. The company started in May 2006 with a target of Rs. 1,50,000 and there will be an increase of Rs. 30,000 every month. For me the exact target should start from Rs. 80,000. In the launching month itself the target given to me and other medical representatives was very high. I should say the target was hectic and unrealistic. To gain familiarity with doctors itself will take some time. What I felt was, while the company fixing targets, they had not analyzed the potential of the market and the had never considered the competition in cardiac–diabetic segment. If the company set an unrealistic target an automatic pressurized feeling will start from Zonal Sales Manager to Regional Manager to Area Sales Manager, and finally to Medical Sales Representative. This company had a monthly sales review meeting. First sales review meeting itself was discussing about target, I really felt a selling concept in the company. I believe in customer orientation and holistic marketing concept rather than selling-oriented concept. All the Medical Sales Representatives and Area Sales Manager attended the meeting got pressurized on the sales target for the next month. Actually, the exerted pressure on Medical Sales Representative like me started doing selling approach by imparting selling-oriented sales behavior in us. We concentrated more on selling the product rather than understanding the needs of the customer. The only thing that was in our mind was the sales closing date and target attainment. If we are creating a pressurized selling culture in an organization, it will create a negativity in sales behavior among medical representatives. The different sales behavior is explained in the view point of Medical Sales Representatives are as follows. Selling‐oriented selling behavior among medical sales representatives: If a medical representative is approaching with a diabetic product to a doctor, the medical representative of the pharma company is representing will have different drugs (molecule) for treating diabetics. Some examples of drugs used by doctors for treating diabetics was metformin, glimepiride, glibenclamide, etc. Some doctors

84    G. Arun and C. G. Manoj Krishnan won’t prescribe glibenclamide for treating diabetics, if the medical representative is approaching the doctor and promote glibenclamide, which is a drug that was not prescribed by doctor. We can say that the medical representative is approaching the doctor without understanding his needs and wants. Before we visit a doctor for promoting a drug, we should take information from the pharmacy and the nearby medical shop to understand, which drug is been prescribed by the doctor for a particular disease at different levels. If this is not done, we can say that the particular person is practicing selling orientation. If the medical representative is painting a rosy picture about the drug also another classical situation of selling orientation behavior. Another situation is that the medical sales representative will stretch the truth about a product to the customer. Selling-oriented sales behavior is practiced when there is a huge pressure to achieve the target from the front-line manager and the company. Customer‐oriented selling behavior among medical sales representatives: If a medical representative is approaching a doctor after analyzing his needs and wants and promoting products accordingly. The medical representative approaching doctor should have a positive mindset of helping doctors in making satisfactory purchase decisions. Medical representative should only offer drugs which are really suitable to doctors for prescribing to a disease. Medical representatives should accurately describe the product. The medical representative should never pressurize the doctor in purchasing or prescribing the medicine offered by the company. If a medical representative wants to practice customer-oriented selling behavior, there should be a good motivating organizational environment is important. The organization and the managers at different levels should promote customer-oriented selling behavior. Adaptive selling behavior among medical sales representatives: The medical representative practicing adaptive selling behavior will always have different strategies to different customers. The salesperson will be flexible enough to tackle any selling situations. The medical representatives will be flexible with different selling approaches in different selling circumstances. This adaptive selling behavior will create a positiveness in the mind of the customer which helps to create customer trust and customer value. Unethical selling behavior among medical sales representatives: Unethical selling behavior among medical representatives are making false claim about the products, making false claim about competitors, answering the queries of customers without proper knowledge, misrepresentation, etc., are some classical unethical selling behaviors practiced among medical sales representatives. The selling orientated and unethical sales behavior has a negative relationship with trust toward the salesperson and trust toward the selling firm. The customer orientated and adaptive selling behavior has a positive relationship with trust toward the salesperson and trust toward the selling firm. Now after doing many researches in the area of salesperson’s behavior, I realized that the company should take initiative to create a customer-oriented selling culture in an organization. It is all about creating a long-lasting relationship with the customers, that is, doctors. In pharmaceutical industry, customers are dictators rather than a king.

Autocratic Leadership among Managers    85 The major leadership failure in the company that I worked and many other companies are that they always promote a selling orientation concept in marketing by putting too much sales pressure on all levels like Zonal Sales Manager, Regional Manager, Area Sales Manager, and Medical Sales Representatives. The CEO of the company should have given importance to customer orientation selling strategies to impart a great culture of customer centricity.

Background When I was working with a pharmaceutical company; there I witnessed a huge leadership failure in my company. In the company that I worked, I can see a huge pressure of target imposed on Zonal Manager to Regional Manager to Area Sales Manager and finally reaches the Medical Sales Representative, that is, the salesperson. In that company, I was working as a Medical Sales Representative. The problem faced by the managers and salesperson in our company was severe sales pressure from the company and top officials. The major problem everyone was facing was unachievable targets. Since every medical representative was pressurized every day for the targets by the managers at different levels, it even affected the happiness toward the work. Even I felt the company’s school of thought in the management belongs to scientific management which was exercised in early nineteenth century at the time of imperialism and colonialism at its peak. At the year 2015, I started doing my research as part of my PhD program. In my mind the major research problem was the same research problem I identified when I was working with pharmaceutical industry. After the gap of four years in industry, my major question was that now also the same issue is there in the industry. Then I done interview with managers at different levels and some medical sales representatives. Then I came to know that pressurized selling is still prevailing in pharmaceutical industry. Then I learned about different salesperson behavior and how it creates trust and value toward the customer. The different types of salesperson’s behavior are as follows: 1. Selling-oriented behavior – Customer-oriented behavior (SOCO) 2. Adaptive selling behavior 3. Unethical selling

Selling Orientation – Customer Orientation (SOCO) The salespersons practicing selling orientation behavior will give more importance in creating immediate sales without considering customer needs and wants and customer satisfaction. On the other side of the coin the salesperson who practices customer orientation will give more importance to customer benefit and customer satisfaction (Dunlap, Dotson, & Chambers, 1988, p. 186). Customer-oriented behavior is the implementation of the marketing concept in interactions between individual sales people and their customers (Saxe & Weitz, 1982). According to Saxe and Weitz (1982) in their paper titled “The SOCO

86    G. Arun and C. G. Manoj Krishnan Scale: A Measure of the Customer Orientation of Sales People” says that there is some expected behavior from a salesperson who practices customer-oriented behavior (p. 344). The expected behaviors are as follows: ⦁⦁ Helping the customers to evaluate and understand their customer benefit, cus-

tomer needs and wants.

⦁⦁ The salesperson should possess high product knowledge and he should have a

good articulating skill for describing the product to the customers.

⦁⦁ Customer-oriented salesperson should never act against customer expectation. ⦁⦁ Salespersons who practice customer orientation behavior should never mis-

lead, cheat or betray customer.

⦁⦁ Salespersons who practice customer orientation behavior should never pres-

surize the customer to buy particular product/service.

⦁⦁ Salespersons who practice customer orientation behavior should help custom-

ers to make suitable purchase decision.

⦁⦁ Organization culture do plays an important role in making their salespersons

to practice customer-oriented approach rather than selling-oriented approach toward customers while doing personnel selling (Brown, Mowen, Donavan, & Licata, 2002, p. 117).

Adaptive Selling Adaptive selling behavior is defined as the “altering of selling behavior during a customer interaction or across customer interactions based on perceive information about the nature of selling situation” (Weitz, Sujan, & Sujan, 1986, p. 173). Spiro and Weitz (1990) in the paper titled “Adaptive Selling: Conceptualization, Measurement and Nomological Validity” described that there are six different aspects measuring adaptive selling behavior: (1) for different selling circumstances, different selling tactics and methodologies are needed; (2) the salesperson should have good confidence to use diverse selling tactics; (3) confidence in the capability to adjust the selling tactics during a customer interaction; (4) the salesperson should have adequate knowledge on different selling tactics and he should be brilliant enough to convert the knowledge on different selling tactics to sales strategies which is suitable for each situations; (5) the collection of information about the sales situation is important to facilitate adaptation; and (6) finally, the salesperson should make use of different tactics and methodologies according to different selling circumstances (p. 63).

Unethical Selling Salespersons of organizations have carried significant duty regarding organization’s sales and benefit. Therefore, they are under weight to advance their execution which, sometimes, causes to depend on some ill-advised and unethical techniques for additional sales (Cornelia Denisa Ivan, 2014, p. 20). When the competition got increased, the unethical practices also increased simultaneously.

Autocratic Leadership among Managers    87 The customer will lose credibility and trust if there is no straightforwardness and transparency about the offering offered by the selling firm (Reena & Saiyed, 2016, p. 8). If a salesperson is not properly supervised, chances for doing an unethical selling practice by him will be on the higher side (Crosby, Evans, & Cowles, 1990, p. 74). If the sales pressure for the salespersons are very high, chances for practicing unethical behavior will be more. Researches said that salesperson’s ethical behavior creates higher level of customer satisfaction, customer trust and customer loyalty (Román, 2003, p. 924). Some of the unethical practices followed by salespersons are as follows: ⦁⦁ Salespersons lies about competitors and competitor brands – with a specific

end goal to make a successful selling encounter.

⦁⦁ Salespersons lie about the product/service offered by the selling firm with a

specific end goal to make a purchase deal with the customer.

⦁⦁ Salespersons exaggerate potential advantages of the product offered by the

selling firm.

⦁⦁ Giving wrong information to the customer without proper product knowledge. ⦁⦁ Using ambiguous language by the salesperson to confuse the customer regard-

ing the products/service offered by the selling firm. Selling an offering to the customer that is not suitable to his needs and wants.

Cooper and Frank (1991) in his research studies, the accompanying factors impact unethical selling behavior are: (1) personal ethical values and principles; (2) family members and companions who give backing and understanding in determining ethical issues; (3) immediate manager who does not pressurize salesperson in compromising his ethical and moral principles; and (4) a company’s organizational culture which does not inspire salesperson to compromise his ethical and moral principles for achieving organizational objectives. From the above mentioned four different types of salesperson behavior, selling orientation and unethical selling behavior is having a negative relationship with customer trust and customer value. Customer orientation and adaptive selling behavior has a positive relationship with customer trust and customer value. If the salesperson is under severe pressure exerted by the company and CEO’s, they will surely have a tendency to practice selling orientation or unethical selling behavior.

Individual Level In Individual level all managers in a Pharmaceutical Company should create a positive relationship with the salesperson and the managers should make them confident to practice customer orientation and adaptive selling behavior while they interact with the customers. If a company want to create long-lasting relationship with the customers – salesperson interacting process is important. If the managers especially the first-line manager (Area Sales Manager) is putting too much pressure on the salesperson will create a negative impact that leads the

88    G. Arun and C. G. Manoj Krishnan salesperson to practice selling orientation and unethical behavior in sales which ultimately creates a short-term success and a long-term failure in creating longlasting relationship with the customers.

Group Level All levels managers should jointly take a step to create a conducive environment for the salespersons to raise their concerns and issues while interacting with the customers to close the sale. The managers should provide good product training to impart good product knowledge. So, they can handle any question regarding them and the competitors. All level managers in that particular organization should promote customer orientation and adaptive selling while dealing with the customers. For practicing customer orientation or adaptive selling behavior, support from the first-line manager is really important.

Organization Level In the organization level, Senior Level Managers should create a good and conducive organization climate for the salespersons to practice customer oriented and adaptive selling behavior. If managers are putting lot of pressure on the salespersons, it will affect the morale of the salesperson and will end up in practicing selling oriented or unethical selling behavior. If a salesperson is not performing well and the salesperson is practicing selling oriented or unethical selling behavior, it is a leadership failure. This type of leadership failure is that I witnessed in my company. I had done my PhD research work also on the same area. Many pharmaceutical companies are pressurizing the salesperson to achieve target and finally the customer – salesperson relationship is badly affected.

Leadership Lesson ⦁⦁ Senior manager should create a good organization culture and climate to prac-

⦁⦁

⦁⦁ ⦁⦁

⦁⦁

tice customer orientation and adaptive selling behavior for creating customer trust and customer value. If the manager is too autocratic to salesperson about the targets, from that instance itself the salesperson will start practicing selling orientated and unethical behavior which will end up in creating a negative impact on customer trust and customer value. An ethical orientation should be imparted to salespersons by the managers. First-line manager should maintain a good and motivating relationship with the salespersons. So, they can practice customer orientation and adaptive selling behavior. There should be a positive emotional relationship between first-line manager (Area Sales Manager) and the salesperson, that is, Medical Sales Representative. It is all about creating an organizational citizenship behavior to salesperson.

Autocratic Leadership among Managers    89 ⦁⦁ The manager had to take care of salesperson’s happiness at work too, because

salesperson is having the direct relationship with the customers. If a salesperson is not happy with the mangers or the company policies; it will affect the customers.

Conclusion If any pharmaceutical company has to be successful for a long run, the company should promote an organization culture and climate that is conducive enough to practice customer oriented and adaptive selling behavior. Nowadays, it is all about relationship marketing, if a salesperson wants to create a long-lasting relationship, they had to practice customer orientation and adaptive selling. For that a support from the managers and the company is important. Company should create a working environment that supports customer orientation and adaptive selling rather than selling orientation and unethical selling. This was the major issue that I face when I was working as a Medical Representative in a pharmaceutical industry. This chapter will be an eye opener to many first-line managers for helping their salespersons to practice customer orientation and adaptive selling behavior.

References Beer, M. (2001). How to develop an organization capable of sustained high performance: Embrace the drive for results–capability development paradox. Organizational Dynamics, 29, 233–247. Bellizzi, J., & Hite, R. (1989). Supervising unethical salesforce behavior. Journal of Marketing, 53(2), 36–47. Brown, T. J., Mowen, J. C., Donavan, D. T., & Licata, J. W (2002). The customer orientation of service workers: Personality trait effects on self and supervisory performance ratings. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 110–119. Cooper, R. W., & Frank, G. L. (1991). Ethics in the Life Insurance Industry: The issues, helps and hindrances. Journal of the American Society of CLU & ChFC, 45, 54–66. Cornelia Denisa Ivan. (2014). Ethical behaviour in sales and its effect on customers. Valahian Journal of Economic Studies, 5(19), 17–26. Crosby, L., Evans, K., & Cowles, D. (1990). Relationship quality in services selling: An interpersonal influence perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 68–81. Dunlap, B. J., & Dotson, M. J., & Chambers, T. M. (1988). Perceptions of real-estate brokers and buyers: A sales-orientation, customer-orientation approach. Journal of Business Research, 17(2), 175–187. Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership: A positive developmental approach. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship (pp. 241–261). San Francisco, CA: Barrett-Koehler. Reena, T., & Saiyed, W. A. (2016). Ethical issues in insurance marketing in India: The policy holders’ view. SIBM Pune Research Journal, 11(1), 1–12. Román, S. (2003). The impact of ethical sales behaviour on customer satisfaction, trust and loyalty to the company: An empirical study in the financial services industry. Journal of Marketing Management, 19(9–10), 915–939.

90    G. Arun and C. G. Manoj Krishnan Saxe, R., & Weitz, B. A. (1982). The SOCO Scale: A measure of the customer orientation of salespeople. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(3), 343–351. Schwepker, C. H., Jr. (2003). Customer-oriented selling: A review, extension, and directions for future research. The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 23(2), 151–171. Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfilment (pp. 1–336). New York, NY: Free Press. Spiro, R. L., & Weitz, B. A. (1990). Adaptive selling: Conceptualization, measurement, and nomological validity. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(1), 61–69. Weitz, B. (1981). Effectiveness in sales interactions: A contingency framework. Journal of Marketing, 45(1), 85–103. Weitz, B. A., Sujan, H., & Sujan, M. (1986). Knowledge, motivation, and adaptive behavior: A framework for improving selling effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 50(4), 174–191.

Chapter 9

Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment: The Importance of Leading Oneself Randal Joy Thompson Abstract Failing to effectively play their leadership role can have a devastating effect not only on leaders, but also on the group or team they are responsible to lead, as well as on the organization or organizations they belong to and/or serve. In the following example of a leadership failure, the author’s inability to come to the plate to play her required role as a leader had a negative impact on her professional standing, as well as on a number of individuals who she was called to lead. This example illustrates the necessity to master “leading oneself ” prior to leading others. Cleaning out the cobwebs in one’s own psyche and mastering emotional intelligence are pre-conditions for effective leadership. This is especially true when leading in a foreign cultural context as this chapter shows. A leader always faces the possibility of having to deal with individuals who bring out those inner parts of oneself that have not yet been dealt with and healed. This chapter focuses on the importance of the key ingredient of leading oneself, namely emotional intelligence. Within emotional intelligence, the author examines her leadership failure in relation to self-awareness and self-regulation while leading a US government foreign assistance project. She highlights the negative impact on her leadership of fear that arose from unresolved past conflicts remaining in my shadow side. “Self-betrayal” emerged as a key factor also in her leadership failure. Keywords: Courage; emotional intelligence; international development; leadership shadows; leading oneself; self-betrayal

When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 91–102 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211009

92    Randal Joy Thompson

Introduction Failing to effectively play their leadership role can have a devastating effect not only on leaders, but also on the group or team they are responsible to lead, as well as on the organization or organizations they belong to and/or serve. In the following example of a leadership failure, my inability to come to the plate to play my required role as a leader had a negative impact on my professional standing, as well as on a number of individuals who I was called to lead. This example illustrates the necessity to master “leading oneself ” prior to leading others. Cleaning out the cobwebs in one’s own psyche and mastering emotional intelligence are pre-conditions for effective leadership. A leader always faces the possibility of having to deal with individuals who bring out those inner parts of oneself that have not yet been dealt with and healed. This chapter focuses on the importance of “leading oneself.” In particular, the chapter focuses on the key ingredient of leading oneself, namely emotional intelligence. Within emotional intelligence, I examine my leadership failure in relation to self-awareness and self-regulation. I highlight the negative impact on my leadership of fear that arose from unresolved past conflicts remaining in my shadow side. “Self-betrayal” emerged as a key factor also in my leadership failure.

Background My leadership failure occurred on a United States (US) government funded foreign assistance project I was leading in a developing country. The United States delivers foreign assistance via several US government agencies. The assistance is predominantly delivered via projects, defined as temporary organizations that deliver technical assistance, training, and commodities to developing countries to help improve the quality of life of their populace (Thompson, 2016, 2018). Projects are typically designed to improve education, health, infrastructure, business, civil society, and government. The management structure of foreign assistance projects is complex. Generally, the US government agency involved in designing the projects, competing them to private sector for-profit or non-profit businesses, and then managing them ensures that they comply with their contracts and achieve the required results. Along with a US contracting officer, legally responsible for ensuring that the implementing contractor follows the contract, the US government agency involved appoints what is called a “contracting officer representative,” who is the US point of contact with the contractor. Often the contracting officer representative is a foreign national from the aid-receiving developing country. US foreign assistance projects are implemented by contractor teams, led by what is called a chief of party, supported by a deputy chief of party and other members of the team as required to implement the particular project. I was the chief of party of a contractor-led five-year project in a developing country, whose purpose was to monitor and evaluate other US projects to ensure that they were achieving results; to conduct sectoral and other assessments and studies to help the US design a country assistance strategy; to provide training and capacity building to other US contractors and their staff as well as to local government

Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment    93 officials and nongovernment beneficiaries; and to help the United States learn from their projects so that they could make evidence-based decisions about the future projects. Our team had the responsibility to become acquainted with more than 25 US funded projects in the country, to monitor them; to conduct periodic evaluations of their achievements; to invite them to trainings to build their capacity in management, monitoring, and evaluation; and to disseminate lessons learned to improve future management and results. The team members I led were all from the aid-receiving developing country. The team consisted of a deputy chief of party; six monitoring, evaluation, and learning specialists; a geographic information system specialist; and two finance and administrative specialists. The US government contracting officer representative, responsible for managing the project for the United States, was a local country national woman with a strong personality who had worked herself up the ranks of the US agency over her 20-year tenure. This was, however, the first project she had ever managed for the US government. As chief of party, I led the team of 10, who had various responsibilities. The deputy chief of party, in addition to supporting me and replacing me when I went on leave, was building a master list of all the indicators the 25 projects were using to measure their outcomes and impact. He was also taking the lead in reviewing project monitoring, evaluation, and learning plans of each of the projects required so that the US government could track the success of the projects. In addition to helping to review all the US project monitoring, evaluation, and learning plans, the monitoring, evaluation, and learning specialists were involved in project evaluations, and also in developing a complex index to measure the aid-receiving government’s progress in achieving rule-of-law in the country. The geographic information specialist was building maps that represented where projects were working and key points of interest for the US government. Together, our team was developing a complex database system into which all the projects would report their data to measure several levels of results indicators. We also were hosting trainings for the staff of other US funded projects on management, monitoring and evaluation, and geographic information systems. As chief of party, in addition to leading the project team, I was accountable to the US agency and also to the contractor home office that hired me and which I represented. Their contractor home office was located back in the United States. The contractor home office also had an individual called a “program manager” who was responsible for ensuring that our project satisfied the US agency, which was the client, and achieved our purpose and for ensuring that I completed my job professionally and according to US government regulations. The contractor company’s future business depended upon my performance. Table 3 illustrates the three organizations involved in the implementation of foreign assistance projects and the roles played by key personnel within each of these organizations. I had already served as a chief of party for two other similar projects in Iraq and Liberia and had been a Commissioned US Foreign Service Officer for 28 years, and hence I had considerable previous experience in leading. I came to the developing country to replace the first chief of party who was forced to leave after only one month.

94    Randal Joy Thompson

Table 3. Roles of Key Individuals Involved in Project Implementation. Organization Involved

Key Personnel Involved in Roles of Key Project Implementation Personnel

US Government Agency Contracting Officer Contracting Officer Representative

Ensure that contractor achieves goals and meets conditions of the project contract

Contractor Home Office Program Manager

Oversees project to ensure that it meets the needs and demands of USG Agency client

Project in Developing Country

Responsible for achieving project goals and satisfying terms of contract

Chief of Party Deputy Chief of Party

Leadership Challenge and Failure Soon after I arrived, I started hearing the stories of the strange occurrences on the project. The contracting officer representative, working for the US agency, who had never played this role before, had adopted a highly authoritarian leadership style which greatly exceeded her authority, as defined in US government regulations, and the contractor company back in the United States, who was new in the business of foreign aid, had been allowing her to overstep her duties and dictate the internal management of the project. She had not liked the first chief of party and two other staff, and hence had pressured the contractor company to terminate them, even though the US government cannot legally tell contractors to fire their staff. She had also required that the contractor hire her friend to work on the project, a highly domineering woman economist also from the developing country who had great ambitions. The contracting officer representative immediately started pressuring me to fire people she did not like. In addition, she came to our project almost daily to give me instructions regarding my staff and informing me of their weaknesses. She also advised me where staff should sit. I had never encountered a contracting officer representative like her and I was perplexed about how to handle her. I actually lived in fear of her visits and her domineering manner, which seemed to threaten me and make me feel like I was not a good leader. My stomach churned at the thought of her and I experienced enormous stress after her visits. As the project progressed, I also developed the fear to confront her or to contact the US contracting officer about her behavior, knowing that if I did, I would be terminated. I realized that I had no voice and this realization caused me emotional and physical pain. I was never allowed to establish myself as the true leader of the project because of the contracting officer representative’s interference. My deputy chief of party,

Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment    95 who she constantly pressured and criticized, could not tolerate her pressure and resigned. Shortly thereafter, another staff, who also felt the displeasure of the contracting officer representative, resigned. I had an excellent relationship with all of the staff, but soon learned that the friend of the contracting officer representative on the project, the domineering economist, had her own plans. The program manager from home office in the United States had romantically fallen in love with this friend and began to be manipulated by her to achieve her ambitions. He pressured me to accept her as my deputy chief of party, since he assumed that the contracting officer representative would want this. He informed me that he would serve as the supervisor of the ambitious economist, not I. This would be the first time in my long career as a leader in which my deputy would not report to me, a situation that essentially thwarted my ability to establish my credibility as the leader of the team. The economist, now my deputy, began making snide comments to me and giving me orders, making me really feel off-balance. I did not know how to deal with her and was afraid to speak to her or anyone else about her changed attitude toward me. The program manager at the contractor home office handled all of the negotiations with the domineering economist so I did not have a direct relationship with her to establish her role, her reporting arrangements, her salary, or future promises made to her about becoming eventually the chief of party. The program manager’s supervisor, also from the contractor home office, happened to be in town so I complained to him that I thought this arrangement was strange. He apparently expressed some anger at the program manager because after that my relationship with the program manager dramatically changed for the worse. He was visibly upset but we never discussed the situation so it remained unclear exactly what his supervisor told him. He began to send me harsh emails at 11 o’clock at night and I had a difficult time sleeping. I called the personnel officer at the company to discuss these emails but I was afraid to tell her who they were from. She just excused the person, saying something like “he was going through a divorce,” making it obvious that she knew who he was, because, in fact, he was in the midst of a divorce. Due to his affection toward the domineering economist, the program manager decided he wanted to have a stronger presence in country and hence he began to push me aside. He began to represent the project in addition to the contracting officer representative. He was also the go-between between the contracting officer representative and me. He had a good relationship with her because he was extremely motivated to please the client. He told the contracting officer representative that I would have a limited presence at an important workshop despite the fact that being chief of party, I was supposed to always attend such events and had always done so before in other projects. I made the mistake of agreeing to my limited presence then changed my mind and went anyway, although I played an insignificant role there, out-staged by the program manager, who played the role I should have been playing. The contracting officer representative became extremely angry and told the program manager that she was not going to pay me, an absurd statement. She had no control over my salary payment, since I worked for the contractor, not her.

96    Randal Joy Thompson Contracting officer representatives have no authority over payments to individuals in contractor private companies. At my wits end, I called the contracting officer’s representative supervisor, an American, who I thought would understand the absurdity of the situation. Since I had worked for the United States for 28 years and he held the same position I had held, I thought he would understand. He told me the situation sounded strange and that he would get back to me. He never did. A few weeks later I was terminated. I assume I was terminated for going above the head of the contracting officer representative. Americans almost always support their local national staff without question even when their staff are wrong. I had a very close relationship with my team and they kept in touch with me. They wrote me that the program manager and the domineering economist had a love affair that created a scandal all over the community and that she left her husband and baby boy. She reportedly became known as “the woman who abandoned her family for an expatriate guy.” Eventually, when she was named chief of party, she dumped “the expatriate guy.” He apparently cried on the shoulder of several staff who relayed to me that he was a totally distraught, broken man. I started working with another company who was collaborating with the company I worked for in this case study. Interestingly, the companies were collaborating on a joint evaluation with the program manager from the above-described project. They were on the phone with him daily and were planning to speak the next day. Instead, they received an email from his company that the program manager would not be contacting them but rather someone else. Apparently, the program manager had been summarily fired. The company I was then working for was subsequently interested in hiring the program manager because he had expertise in impact evaluations, so they interviewed him. However, they did not hire him because he announced that he would only accept the offer if he could have the position of the woman who interviewed him, my supervisor at the time. Obviously, this did not go over well. She certainly was not going to give him her position. The next day, the company I was working for received an anonymous letter from Europe advising them not to hire the program manager because his company had fired him for “sexual harassment.” I heard from my former staff on the project that the domineering economist now chief of party also suddenly left the project. I never found out why or the details of the sexual harassment charge. I must say, I was left puzzled and dazed from this entire experience.

Deconstruction of Experience and Leadership Lessons This experience served as an excellent lesson for challenges in leading oneself in a temporary project organization. My weaknesses in emotional intelligence led to my leadership failure in being able to effectively maneuver in what I perceived as a hostile work environment.

Individual Level By “leading oneself,” I adopt the definition offered by scholars of peace leadership Van Zyl and Campbell (2019) who argued that leading oneself “involves

Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment    97 transforming self to lead others within the community through emotional intelligence” (n.p.). Emotional intelligence as originally defined by Goleman comprises (1) self-awareness; (2) self-regulation; (3) social skills; (4) empathy; and (5) motivation. Self-awareness and self-regulation are most relevant to my situation. Goleman (2005) conceived of self-awareness as the knowledge of one’s internal states, resources, preferences, and intuitions. This awareness includes recognizing one’s emotions and their effects. He (2005) defined self-regulation as the management of one’s internal states, resources, and impulses and to be able to maintain self-control. This would include becoming aware of one’s shadow side, those negative aspects of one’s personality and character that are initially unconscious. I had never read the self-leadership literature, nor ever considered the reality that I had the responsibility to effectively lead myself before leading others. This leadership fiasco made me realize that I needed to better lead myself. I recognized that I needed heightened self-awareness, an essential aspect of emotional intelligence. I was not aware of my fear of dominating personalities until this situation, and although I could see that my fear was having a detrimental impact on me, the team, and the organization, I was not able to control it. Apparently, this fear was buried in my unconscious and was part of my shadow side. It only emerged when I was confronted by a certain personality type. As Bryant (2016) emphasized: Without self-awareness you are locked into a stimulus-response nightmare; operating from the unconscious and out of date programs and reacting to situations rather than influencing them. (n.p.) An essential aspect of self-awareness is curiosity to wonder what the other person is doing rather than to focus on our emotional response to their actions (Bryant, 2016), hence to become active rather than passive in the situation. As Bryant (2016) contended: Self-awareness, allows us to “step back” from a situation and ask, “Why am I doing this?” “What causes me to see it this way?” and “How can I think and feel differently to get different results?” (n.p.) The strong personalities of the women contracting officer representative and economist on my team caused me to freeze. Instead of explaining my point-ofview and how I could manage the project as the chief of party, I was silent. When the contracting officer representative intruded into the project and took actions that were completely beyond her legal purview, I was silent, almost cowering, instead of calmly and confidently explaining what my role was and what I perceived as her role. She was new to this role and perhaps did not understand her role, since apparently neither her American supervisor nor the American contract officer had prepared her.

98    Randal Joy Thompson Hence, I could have mentored her. In a way, she frightened me and I was in a state of constant fear and stress, something I had never felt before in my career of over 30 years. Somehow her personality brought out my deep-seated fear that had been implanted in me early in my life and made me freeze instead of speaking. She complained that I did not speak enough, but my silence stemmed from this visceral fear that emerged from somewhere deep in my psyche. I could have taken charge of the situation and established myself as the leader of my team. Instead, I allowed her to dominate me. When the company program manager had pushed me aside and served as gobetween between the contracting officer representative as well as the economist on my team, I could have talked with him and with each of them separately to ensure that communication was direct. Complaining to the program manager’s supervisor regarding the indirect communication was a serious mistake. In addition, when the contracting officer representative told the program manager that she would not pay me, I should have spoken directly to the contracting officer representative about this. Moreover, I could have gone to the US contracting officer if things got really bad, but I lived in terror and was afraid to call him. Through “self-betrayal” (Arbinger Institute, 2018), I constructed myself as victim in this situation, while I constructed the others as my victimizers. With such a construction, I pushed myself into a state of silence. I recognized that constructing myself as victim had been a pattern in life which had basically stripped me of self-power. Self-betrayal results in one’s construction of the world in selfjustifying ways, distorts reality, and causes one to “enter the box” of self-deception and inaction and places others in a box (Arbinger Institute, 2018). This leads to exaggerating one’s own virtue and the others’ faults and blame. I essentially stripped myself of power and even of words. As Arbinger Institute (2018) pointed out: But remember, when we’re in the box, we’re self-deceived – we’re blind to the truth about others and ourselves. And one of the things we’re blind to is how the box itself undercuts our every effort to obtain the outcomes we think we want. (n.p.) I recognized that I lacked self-regulation (Goleman, 2005; Noyes, 2001), as I was unable to unlock myself from my visceral response to the situation. I was unable to distance myself and reflect and change my emotional response to the difficult personalities I was dealing with and to speak and take my place as the leader of the team and the project. Had I stepped back and pulled myself together and recognized my inner turmoil, I could have changed the way I spoke and hence possibly changed from a victim to a true leader (Kegan & Lahey, 2001).

Group Level Through my leadership failure, I discovered first hand that a group or team is attuned to the emotional state of the leader and depend on that emotional state to a great extent for their sense of well-being (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002).

Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment    99 These authors called the emotional task as “primal” and “the original and most important act of leadership” (n.p.). My emotional state was extremely negative because of my inability to effectively relate to the contracting officer representative and my team obviously sensed this. As Goleman et al. pointed out (2002), negative emotions negatively impact the performance of teams. Such emotions cause dissonance instead of the resonance a team need to be high performing. Instead of dissipating the negativity which the contracting officer representative brought to our team, my response of fear and frustration magnified it. Furthermore, in an inter-cultural situation when the leader is an expatriate, the team, if comprised of locals, must be loyal to local leaders, even if not their personal leaders, in order to preserve their status and their job. Hence, my team, comprised of all local nationals, ultimately needed to please the contracting officer representative to maintain their positions, as they perceived her as the one ultimately in charge. Fortunately, I had a good working relationship with the entire team, and with the economist on my team before she became involved with the program manager from home office so they supported me even though also supporting her, albeit a bit grudgingly. The team sensed my extreme discomfort with the contracting officer ­representative as well as my inability to effectively deal with her and this put them in a difficult position. They were loyal to me but recognized that they also needed to show loyalty to the contracting officer representative. They recognized that she was extremely difficult but they sought to deal with her in order to survive. This created for them and for me a somewhat tense situation because I recognized that they had to have split loyalties and that they could not “come over to my side” so to speak. This reality enhanced my sense of isolation. Some of them tried to play a reconciliatory role by inviting the contracting officer representative, the program manager, and me for happy hour or for lunch. In reality, we enjoyed these times together and everything seemed amicable, at least briefly. I felt that the two team members who resigned because they had experienced the chagrin and displeasure of the contracting officer representative blamed me for not protecting them as did the staff member who was fired before I arrived. The one terminated expected that I could prevent her firing and she called me where I was working in another country even before I assumed the role of chief of party and again after I arrived in country. She did not understand that I had little power to stand against the contracting officer representative who was our client or our company who was doing everything the contracting officer representative wanted in order to keep the contract. I disappointed all three staff members. I realized how important it is for a leader to manifest a clear sense of being in control of a situation, however difficult, and for a leader to maintain a calm and positive attitude for the sake of the team (Goleman et al., 2002).

Organization Level The implementation framework for foreign assistance projects is complex, as described above, because there are at least three organizations involved that

100    Randal Joy Thompson need to work together to accomplish the project’s objective. These include US agency, the client; the company who won the contract; and the project temporary organization. The three organizations involved have different agendas and different purposes and audiences, which often militate against working collaboratively together (Thompson, 2016). The United States needs to ensure that contracts are well-implemented to assure the US Congress that taxpayers’ monies are being effectively spent. The US agency should monitor but not manage projects, which are implemented by private for- or not-for-profit companies. Companies that hold the contracts need to fulfill the requirements of the client, the US agency, in order to keep their contract and to improve their chances of winning contracts in the future. The United States writes a yearly evaluation that is placed in a database accessible by all US government agencies. Companies’ success depends on selecting an effective chief of party and implementation team and of supporting the team in producing work of a high quality acceptable by the client. The temporary project team works in between these two organizations and is often squeezed by them and made into a scapegoat in order to relieve the other organizations of responsibility. The chief of party generally is not a long-term employee of the contractor company but is instead on a contract that is easily broken “at will” with no reason given. Hence, the company generally has no loyalty to the chief of party and sees the chief of party as the vehicle to maintain the company’s reputation and to ensure more work. The chief of party is also held responsible by the United States and the company to ensure that the entire team completes high-quality work. Hence, my leadership failure of not pleasing the contracting officer representative obviously placed the company I worked for at risk. It was incumbent upon the company to do whatever it took to keep the contract and that meant for them to do everything the contracting officer representative wanted whether or not it what she wanted was in her purview. Hence, when the contracting officer representative was angry that I called her supervisor and wanted me gone, the company had no alternative but to terminate me, even though I was doing a good job. I became a potential “saboteur,” as Daskal (2017) titled the leaders who have the shadow of fear of failure as well as fear of success. I became a liability to the organization. Additionally, by that point the program manager was deeply involved with the economist and hence he wanted to push me aside so he could spend more time with her. My leadership failure had essentially removed any power I might have had had I taken charge of my position to resist this move. De Hahn (2016) cautioned that such a leadership failure can have a negative impact on the organization. As he explained, Failure to restrain the demons within, i.e. the leadership shadow, can result in a toxic organization and to very costly and bruising adjustments. Appreciating the benefits of certain attributes, whilst understanding when they tip into shadow side characteristics

Leadership Failure in a Hostile Environment    101 provides the key to actively managing them, reducing the risk to the organization as well as the risk of personal leadership derailment. (p. 511) Chiefs of party have the responsibility to attempt to build a collaborative leadership coalition, comprised of the chief of party, the contracting officer representative, and the company leaders, so that they are all working together toward a common goal and not working at loggerheads (Thompson, 2016). A leadership approach combined transformational adaptive system leadership, which would focus the leaders on the change process that they are all responsible for and which would build collaboration among all the leaders and their organizations (Thompson, 2016). By failing to take charge of my role as chief of party in this situation, I was unable to help create this collaborative framework and bring all the actors together.

Conclusion In this chapter, I have presented my leadership failure while serving as the leader of a US foreign assistance project. I have argued that my lack of emotional intelligence and my consequent self-betrayal led me to react the way I did to a challenging situation. I was silenced by an internal fear that the personalities involved in the situation brought out in me. My reaction made me realize that I need to focus on leading myself before I can effectively lead others. The situation heightened my realization that my emotional state impacted the team and that my reactions to the personalities in the situation made the team feel insecure and increased their need to please the US contracting officer representative in order to secure their positions. I recognized how important it is for a leader to exude a sense of self-confidence, peace, and control of whatever situation in order to foster the well-being of a team or group. I recognized from my leadership failure that it is critical for a chief of party of a foreign assistance project to take the lead to attempt to unify leaders from the various organizations involved in the implementation of such projects. Leaders in the other organizations are blinded in a sense by their own objectives and the chief of party, being in-between, dealing with both, and directly responsible for achieving the project goals can help to move leaders from a sense of competition and power inequality to one of collaboration. However, this requires confronting one’s shadow side. I realized that being inspired by others’ courage can help heal the inner wounds that trap us. I thought of the Afghan women leaders who were willing to die in order to lead and their courage to speak their minds even when they endured the hourly threat of assassination (Thompson, 2015). How could I be afraid to speak up in a relatively safe situation when these Afghan women faced a tangible threat? Several of them were in fact assassinated. Reflecting on their courage has helped me to garner my own courage to speak up and take charge of myself and of my role as a leader in future situations.

102    Randal Joy Thompson

References Arbinger Institute. (2018). Leadership and self-deception. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Bryant, A. (2016). Self-leadership: 12 powerful mindsets and methods to win in life and business. Singapore: Andrew Bryant. Daskal, L. (2017). The leadership gap: What gets between you and your greatness. New York, NY: Penguin Radom House. De Hahn, E. (2016). The leadership shadow: How to recognise and avoid derailment, hubris, and overdrive. Leadership, 12(4), 504–512. Goleman, D. (2005). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York, NY: Bantam Books. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. (2001). How the way we talk can change the way we work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Noyes, R. (2001). The art of leading yourself: Tap the power of your emotional intelligence. Scotts Valley, CA: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform. Thompson, R. (2015). Dying to lead: Women leaders in Afghanistan. In S. Madsen, F. Ngunjiri, K. Longman, & C. Cherrey (Eds.), Women and leadership around the world. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers. Thompson, R. (2016). Theorizing women’s ways of knowing and leading for international development projects: The adaptive transformational system leadership model. In J. Storberg-Walker & P. Haber-Curran (Eds.), Theorizing women and leadership: New insights and contributions from multiple perspectives. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers. Thompson, R. (2018). Leadership and power in international development: Navigating ­gender, culture, context, and sustainability. London: Emerald Publishing. Van Zyl, E., & Campbell, A. (2019). Peace leadership: Self-transformation to peace. Randburg: KAR Publishing.

Chapter 10

Toxic Leadership: A Quick Erosion of Psychological Safety Carly Speranza Abstract This chapter explores the timeline of Lieutenant Colonel Myer’s year in military command and how the culture was significantly impacted by her reign of terror and toxic leadership (Reed, 2004). A once jovial and productive organization, quickly after Myer’s assumed command the military squadron took on an appearance of disenchantment and mistrust of authority. Eventually, due to Myer’s toxic leadership practices, organizational cohesiveness and performance eroded, and new employee groups formed in an effort to feel less vulnerable and attempt to find solidarity in numbers and neutralize Myer’s destructive leadership (Konopaske, Ivancevich, & Matteson, 2018; Milosevic, Maric, & Loncar, 2019). In the end, and after several horrific events, many groups pushed upwards, broke the chain of command, and demanded that Myers be removed from command. Keywords: Hostile work environment; psychological safety; toxic leadership; military; destructive leadership; mistrust

Introduction When Colonel Hall was asked by squadron personnel, “Why did you select Lieutenant Colonel Myers as our military commander, the Colonel responded, “I wanted to change things up a bit. I didn’t expect to get Hitler.” Colonel Hall made this statement to the entire military squadron of 100-plus personnel at an emergency meeting on Monday morning explaining why Lieutenant Colonel 1

Names have been changed to protect personal identities

When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 103–111 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211010

104    Carly Speranza Myers had been removed from military command the previous week after senior leadership lost all faith and trust in her ability to lead. Prior to her departure, Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Stephanie Myers led the military squadron with a heavy hand and established a dysfunctional environment over the course of her command tenure. She often displayed hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviors that increased employee anxiety, dissatisfaction, and ultimately resulted in the loss of human capital to the organization. In response to Lt Col Myers’s toxic leadership, over time and after several key personnel voluntarily left the unit, the military squadron began to turn against Lt Col Myers and attempted to neutralize her toxic effects by going outside of the chain of command to have her removed. Eventually, the squadron personnel were successful; however, not before the damage was done and Lt Col Myer’s toxic charge caused professional and personal lives to be lost.

The Early Months In 2006, Lt Col Stephanie Myers was a smart, hard-working woman who was promoting quickly through the ranks in the United States Air Force. That summer she was competitively selected to take command of a highly visible Intelligence squadron that supported approximately 900 combat missions a day across the globe. On her first day, during her military change of command ceremony, she shocked everyone by exclaiming that she was increasing the duty day by at least an hour a day, and that she was not a “cheerleader” for others. During a typical military change of command ceremony, the outgoing commander makes brief remarks on their time in command, roughly two to three years, and then invites the new commander to share their leadership philosophy with the new organization that they are charged to lead. Military members listen closely to this leadership philosophy because it gives them a glimpse into how this new commander will lead the organization. Lt Col Myer’s words came as a shock and quickly set many personnel on edge. Prior to my experience with Lt Col Myers, I had exposure to roughly eight or nine different military commanders. Because military members move every two to three years, we tend to experience many kinds of leaders and learn to quickly adapt to different leadership styles. While most commanders, especially in the first few months of command, reach out to meet and get familiar with their personnel, Lt Col Myers did not do this. She walked the halls with purpose and typically did not respond when greeted by her own personnel. In fact, on one occasion I came across her in close quarters, said “good morning” and she merely glared at me and continued to walk away. I was completely taken aback. Lt Col Myers was brilliant. She had a quick mind and absorbed information at an amazing rate. She also had a confidence that resonated off of her and appeared extremely comfortable engaging with more senior leaders. In fact, when surrounded by her superiors she was affable and at ease, which was in severe contrast to how she appeared when in the company of her subordinates. Within a month or two of taking command, Lt Col Myers replaced roughly four out of five of her division chiefs. These division chiefs were her direct reports and they were who the personnel came in contact with every day. While Lt Col

Toxic Leadership: A Quick Erosion of Psychological Safety    105 Myers was the face of the squadron, she had many meetings outside of the organization that forced her division chiefs to step up and run most of the operations. However, while often away at outside meetings, Lt Col Myers would return most late afternoons to hold long, painful meetings with her division chiefs where she micromanaged and criticized most of their work. So, while the division chiefs were left in charge, they were not empowered and were often left bewildered, expecting to be chastised when Lt Col Myers returned.

Erosion of Psychological Safety Within the first few months, I noticed that squadron personnel were working an average of 12 to 13 hours a day, roughly 2 to 3 hours longer than before the change of command. In addition, 1 or 2 division chiefs were working upwards of 14 to 15 hours a day just to keep up with the increasing scrutiny that Lt Col Myers inflicted on specific areas of the organization. Also, people began to argue amongst each other more often, and everyone seemed on edge. In fact, I often noticed my division chief looking strung out and as though she spent the last 30 minutes crying quietly in her office. While Lt Col Myers inflicted great scrutiny on most personnel, she had a few subordinates that she seemed to favor and treated them extremely well. One of these personnel was Master Sergeant Kline. Master Sergeant Kline was a war hero who had served honorably in Iraq prior to his current assignment. He was the senior enlisted member of the organization, and critical to Lt Col Myers’s insight to the organization’s younger personnel. He was charismatic, well liked, and Lt Col Myers treated him almost as an equal. This was surprising because Master Sergeant Kline disappeared most afternoons for quite some time, worked less hours than most, and did not appear to contribute directly to any taskings, but he did talk a good game. Lt Col Myers had a flair for berating people publicly, regardless of rank or position. In fact, on one occasion after I had briefed roughly 40 personnel on the status of operations, she held me in the room and screamed at me for roughly 5–6 minutes for something that was completely out of my control. However, after this scene I walked away laughing to myself. Had anyone else treated me like this, I would have been devastated, but this was typical of Lt Col Myers and people had unfortunately become accustomed to it. I remember exclaiming to my colleagues that she spoke to me as though I was a “dog.” Her disgust and anger emanated from her in a way that I had only witnessed once or twice in my lifetime, and never for something so trivial. While many of us talked about going outside of the organization to complain about her leadership, we were worried about the professional repercussions, and all we had were stories that seemed trivial at the moment. So, we kept pushing on, miserable, stressed, and afraid to take any risk that highlighted ourselves to Lt Col Myers. Almost five months into command, during the holiday season, Lt Col Myers’s leadership style finally began to get attention from her boss, Colonel Hall. Because of the way the organization was run, Lt Col Myers was well isolated from her senior leadership. Subsequently, senior leaders were not aware of her toxic leadership and the toll it was taking on the organization. However, Lt Col Myers’s deputy

106    Carly Speranza commander was good friends with Colonel Hall. After one specific, gruesome encounter with Lt Col Myers, the deputy commander finally went to Colonel Hall to complain. I heard through the rumor mill that she was counseled and told to change her behavior, but there was no evidence that this counseling occurred, and she appeared as toxic as ever. Finally, a month or two after the holidays, her leadership began to show wear on the organization. While military members have limited freedom to leave a location when they choose to, civilians who work in the Department of Defense have complete freedom to quit at any time. The squadron had a heavy civilian population, roughly 25%, and these civilians began to complain about the work environment to the extent that two quit after the holidays and cited to senior leadership that it was because of the toxic work environment created by Lt Col Myers. To add fuel to the fire, the civilians that resigned were effective, well thought of personnel who were critical to operations. Along with civilians leaving the organization, military personnel began to request to deploy outside of their required deployment timelines. In fact, several had recently returned from the Middle East, but were asking to go back to get out of the work environment. One individual had even requested to get permission to head to Iraq for a year, commonly known as a 3-65; however, Lt Col Myers would not approve their departure. In fact, she would not approve of anyone departing the organization for any type of professional exchange or development opportunity, something that is common in the military. Finally, after Colonel Hall had received several complaints about Lt Col Myers and noticed a loss of personnel and morale, he brought in an Air Force agency to complete a unit climate survey. This is something generally done after a Commander’s first year of command; however, Colonel Hall brought in the agency roughly five months early due to rising complaints. A unit climate survey can take a few weeks to complete. It consists of both an on-line survey completed by personnel, and random, in-person interviews across the organization in effort to get the best picture possible of how the organization is functioning. To launch the unit climate survey, Colonel Hall gathered our unit and briefed us on the survey and events that would take place. Lt Col Myers was in attendance, however, was not given an opportunity to speak. Colonel Hall made a point to tell everyone that he wanted to hear the truth about how people felt, that the survey was anonymous, and that he would do everything possible to correct any unit deficiencies or issues brought forth during the unit assessment. The results of the climate survey came out a few months afterwards and the results pointed blatantly to Lt Col Myers’s toxic leadership and the organizational culture that was struggling under the weight of her command. In fact, people banded together during the survey to make certain their voices were heard and that senior leadership was apprised of the ongoing issues. While I’m certain that Colonel Hall counseled her based on the findings, he surprisingly did not remove her from command. However, a new, temporary deputy was put in place for a few months to help smooth the waters a bit.

Toxic Leadership: A Quick Erosion of Psychological Safety    107

The Last Week: Devastation Fast-forward a few months… Things remained pretty much the same; however, the temporary deputy to Lt Col Myers did provide a bit more stability and an avenue that personnel could count on to soften the blows from Lt Col Myers. The deputy knew Lt Col Myers from previous assignments, and she was attuned to her nuances and pet peeves. She would often counsel people on when they should schedule appointments and meetings to ensure that Lt Col Myers was not in one of her “moods” and was less likely to lash out. While the deputy was working well, she was only temporary (she was a military reservist) and was going off of orders soon and would leave the squadron. She had done great work over several months and Lt Col Myers decided that she wanted to throw a farewell party at her house for her deputy and the senior members of the squadron. As I was a senior member of the squadron, I was invited to attend the farewell party. The party was on a Friday evening and began as most parties do… people arrived, talked and enjoyed themselves. Lt Col Myers was serving quite a bit of alcohol at the party and shortly after the formal goodbyes were made to the deputy, I decided to head home. However, just before heading home Master Sergeant Kline made an inappropriate sexual comment to me as I was walking out the door. I honestly don’t quite remember my reaction; however, when I returned home I told my husband about the incident. As I was an officer and Master Sergeant Kline was enlisted, it was against the uniform code of military justice for him to act inappropriately. Monday morning, shortly after I arrived at work, everyone was called into an emergency meeting. It turns out that the party continued for quite some time after my departure. Sometime after 11 p.m. Friday evening, Master Sergeant Kline left Lt Col Myers’ party on his motorcycle, wrecked nearby, and broke his neck. He was drinking heavily and under the influence when this occurred. After the news, the squadron was sent into a tailspin. A military investigation was launched and lawyers were called in to offer Lt Col Myers legal counsel in case she had to bring charges against Master Sergeant Kline because of drunk driving. At the same time, Lt Col Myers began her own investigation and tried to control the narrative of the evening. Within 24 hours, Colonel Hall ordered her to stop interfering with the investigation and to allow the military investigator to do their job. However, she could not help herself and disobeyed orders by secretly meeting with subordinates and threatening them to keep quiet and bring her information; in fact, I was one of those subordinates. On Friday afternoon after most personnel had left for the weekend, one week after the party, Lt Col Myers was fired from command. Her toxic leadership coupled with her immoral actions to control the investigation were discovered and senior leadership lost trust in her ability to command the squadron. Later that evening, around 11 p.m., a young enlisted man in our squadron, Staff Sergeant Shawn Cole, committed suicide and shot himself in front of his wife and child. While Staff Sergeant Cole’s suicide cannot be tied directly to Lt Col Myers, military studies have found that suicidal behavior can be triggered by a toxic work environment (Zwerdling, 2014).

108    Carly Speranza Three days later, on Monday morning, Col Hall gathered everyone together and announced Staff Sergeant Cole’s passing. Then, a moment later, he announced a new commander to replace Lt Col Myers, Lt Col Barrios. Within a week, we had a memorial service for Staff Sergeant Cole where the squadron grieved for a young life needlessly lost. Then, immediately afterwards, Lt Col Barrios began to slowly resuscitate and rebuild the squadron.

The Aftermath It took several months for the investigation of Master Sergeant Kline’s drunk driving accident to conclude. In the end, personnel came forward with information about Master Sergeant Kline, that apparently Lt Col Myers was aware of but hid from everyone to protect him. Master Sergeant Kline recovered from his broken neck; however, he was found guilty of adultery on multiple fronts in military court, including with subordinates’ wives, and was eventually dishonorably discharged from the Air Force. To this day, many of us still believe that Lt Col Myers and Master Sergeant Kline, both of whom were married, were romantically involved. In the end, Lt Col Myers was forced into a staff job where she did not lead anyone and quickly retired from the Air Force and moved on to other civilian job opportunities

Leadership Lessons While Lt Col Myers was a smart and capable woman, she displayed several symptoms of moral exclusion to include double standards, condescension and derogation, and fear of contamination (Johnson, 2018). Over the course of a year, due to Lieutenant Myer’s abuse of positional power and use of coercion (Northouse, 2019), the organization experienced high levels of stress which led to increased absenteeism and a large increase in employee misbehavior to include: adultery, alcoholism, drunk driving, lying, and manipulation (Hackett, 1989; Kickul, 2009). Reed (2004) stated that there are three elements present in a toxic leader: 1. “An apparent lack of concern for the well-being of subordinates. 2. A personality of interpersonal technique that negatively affects organizational climate. 3. A conviction by subordinates that the leader is motivated primarily by self-interest.” (p. 67) Lt Col Myers displayed each of these elements throughout her leadership tenure.

For the Individual Personally, being led by Lt Col Myers was stressful, difficult, and downright horrid. After experiencing her leadership, I promised myself to never dehumanize another human being and ensure that my personnel feel cared for and that they

Toxic Leadership: A Quick Erosion of Psychological Safety    109 have someone in their corner, looking out for them. Since working for her, I have used her as an example of “what not to do” on more occasions than I can count. In fact, I experienced Lt Col Myer’s leadership before I began my doctoral journey in leadership studies. As such, at the time I knew what she was doing was wrong, but I did not have the vocabulary or theoretical knowledge to identify exactly how or why she was failing. It was not until I was in a doctoral class on Ethical Leadership that I was exposed to Craig Johnson’s textbook Meeting the Ethical Challenges of Leadership: Casting Light or Shadow that I began to identify several of his concepts within Lt Col Myers. As mentioned previously, Lt Col Myers created an environment based on moral exclusion (Johnson, 2018). First, she imposed double standards by treating a few personnel as “special” and treating everyone else as outsiders. Subsequently, I have learned firsthand that fairness and consistency are critical to ensure morale remains high in an organization. Second, she often regarded those who were not “special” with distain and condescension, and often displayed hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviors that found by Tepper (2000) often increases employee anxiety and dissatisfaction. This was not something that I needed to learn not to do; however, I have used her actions in my classrooms to explain to students how hurtful personal attacks can be on employee morale and overall organizational health. Bottomline, it is NEVER OK for a superior, or anyone else for that matter, to personally attack or talk down to a fellow employee.

For Groups A once jovial and productive organization, shortly after Lt Col Myers arrived, the squadron took on an appearance of disenchantment and mistrust of authority. It was quite shocking to see how quickly the high-performance culture eroded into one of fear and survival. In fact, the psychological safety of the organization first began to erode during Lt Col Myers’s change of command ceremony where she was uninviting and appeared cold and distant. Then, later in the hallways, she failed to respect her subordinates and would not even make eye contact. Consequently, she appeared more of an adversary and immediately distanced herself from those under her command, actions that do not lead to high-performing teams (Delizonna, 2017). Looking back, it is amazing the damage that Lt Col Myers was able to do in such a short period of time. Within a month, people were beginning to show signs of stress and exhibiting irritation with others around them. Additionally, the micromanagement that she imposed on her subordinate division chiefs nearly paralyzed their ability to do their work and provide timely decisions. Moreover, the squadron stopped being innovative as creativity and individual thought were frowned upon unless it was supported by Lt Col Myers. Consequently, meetings that often took only one hour extended easily to two or three hours as personnel struggled to find solutions that Lt Col Myers would not tear apart. A once high-performing group was forced into a corner because their leader did not trust or empower them. For groups to perform at their peak, they must be empowered, trusted, and free to take calculated risks without fear of punishment (Moussa, Boyer, & Newberry, 2016).

110    Carly Speranza As a result, over time the military squadron began to turn against Lt Col Myers and attempted to neutralize her toxic effects by going outside of the chain of command to have her removed. Additionally, the squadron banded together to provide consistent negative feedback against Lt Col Myers during the unit climate survey. The squadron’s reaction aligns perfectly with Milosevic, Maric, and Loncar’s (2019) findings that in order for followers to defeat a toxic boss they will begin to unfollow their boss and actively work to neutralize their influence. I wholly believe that if Lt Col Myers was not removed, the squadron would have ramped up their campaign to undermine her toxicity and save the organization.

For Organizations Over a period of a few months, Lt Col Myers’ lack of care for her personnel and relentless pursuit to control all actions and information, quickly stripped her subordinates of any influence and power. Gabbaro (2007) refers to the first several months of a new leader as the “taking hold” stage. This is often the period where a new leader begins to shape expectations, goals, and often some elements of the organizational culture. It didn’t take long for personnel to realize that Lt Col Myer’s early entry into the job was not a “blip” in her leadership, but instead, the first several months were merely an introduction to her toxic leadership and it continued on as the year progressed. I believe that Lt Col Myer’s toxic leadership harmed the organization most through the loss of its human capital. This was accomplished through employees who sought new jobs elsewhere, employees who decided to separate from the military entirely, and of course those who tragically took their life. When people no longer feel safe, they will find a way back to safety as best as they can. Unfortunately, Lt Col Myers managed to gut the organization of personnel, and then even those who stayed were shut down to creativity and innovation. While the mission of the organization never truly “failed,” it did not thrive during this period and looking back I am astonished at the amount of damage that one “toxic” leader could levy onto a community. To this point, Porath and Pearson (2009) reported that toxic colleagues have been found to cause a 48% decrease in work effort, 38% decrease in work quality, and 78% decline in commitment to an organization. Due to the damage that toxic leadership can cause an organization, it is critical that leaders are trained to recognize what Pelletier (2010) describes as toxic behaviors so that they can recognize early if they are approaching the “toxic cliff.” Along the same lines, Kellerman (2004) explains that the “bad side” of leadership is one reason that leadership education has grown because people can be educated to recognize bad behaviors. Because of this, it is imperative that organizations continue to support the education and training of their leaders to ensure the mental health and well-being of their most important people: their employees.

Conclusion While Lt Col Myers’s toxic leadership episode took a large toll on professional and personal lives, it serves as an important reminder to individuals, groups, and

Toxic Leadership: A Quick Erosion of Psychological Safety    111 organizations, that toxic leadership does indeed exist and should not be tolerated (Konopaske et al., 2018). For this reason, it is important that toxic leadership be recognized, and that toxic behavior be eradicated from organizations as quickly as possible. Moreover, leadership education and training must continue to be provided to organizational leaders throughout their careers to ensure that organizations and their personnel can flourish through healthy organizational environments and remain creative and innovative without the pall of fear and anxiety.

References Delizonna, L. (2017, August 24). High-performing teams need psychological safety. Here’s how to create it. hbr.org. Gabbaro, J. J. (1985). When a new manager takes charge. Harvard Business Review, 63(3), 110–123. Hackett, R. D. (1989). Work attitudes and employee absenteeism: A synthesis of literature. Journal of Psychology, 62, 235–248. Johnson, C. (2018). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership: Casting light or shadow (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Kickul, J. (2009). When organizations break their promises: Employee reactions to unfair processes and treatment. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(4), 289–307. Konopaske, R., Ivancevich, J. M., & Matteson, M. T. (2018). Organizational behavior & management (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education. Milosevic, I., Maric, S., & Loncar, D. (2019). Defeating the toxic boss: The nature of toxic leadership and the role of followers. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 27(2), 117–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051819833374 Moussa, M., Boyer, M., & Newberry, D. (2016). Committed teams: Three steps to inspiring passion and performance. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Pelletier, K. (2010). Leader toxicity: An empirical investigation of toxic behavior and ­rhetoric. Leadership, 6(4), 373–389. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715010379308 Porath, C., & Pearson, C. (2009, April). How toxic colleagues corrode performance. Harvard Business Review 87(4), 24. Reed, G. E. (2004, July–August). Toxic leadership. Military Review, 67–71. Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. Zwerdling, D. (2014, January 6). Army takes on its own toxic leadership. NPR. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2014/01/06/259422776/army-takes-on-its-own-toxic-leaders

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 11

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: How a Narcissistic Leader Decimated a Faith-Based Nonprofit Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski Abstract A faith-based international nonprofit and its newly hired, narcissistic CEO are examined in this chapter. The CEO made up his own rules acting contrary to many leadership, financial, and HR practices, as well as ignoring the law. As difficulties mounted, there was little to no outcry. Until his abrupt departure seven years later, the CEO operated with impunity. The authors analyze the CEO’s tenure through four lenses – the leader, the followers, the environment, and their faith perspective. As a narcissist, the CEO quickly created a toxic environment and stayed one step ahead of everyone else. Employees were most often compliant and the few who were not found themselves stripped of their position as an example to the onlookers. With the Board in transition, there were no checks and balances and, coupled with a perception of instability, the environment was advantageous for a narcissist. Each of these three lenses was influenced by the faith system which the organization and its employees espoused. Faithbased compliance and organizational silence created an open door for the narcissistic leader and resulted in great damage individually and collectively. The authors offer lessons for individuals, groups, and organizations working under a narcissist. Keywords: Board of directors; followers; gender discrimination; narcissism; organizational silence; toxic triangle

When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 113–125 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211011

114    Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski

Introduction1 In response to Padilla, Hogan, and Kaiser’s (2007) call to examine destructive leadership in religious contexts, we present a case study of a faith-based nonprofit where a Narcissist Leader (NL) was appointed as CEO. In his seven-year term, staff decreased by over 30% and program revenue decreased by over 40%. We describe and analyze the events using Padilla et al.’s “toxic triangle” (p. 176), and we offer implications for practice. The faith-based nonprofit in question was founded on a fairly literal interpretation of the Bible with a focus on training and evangelism. Historically, leadership was selected from within the organization, giving precedence to low power distance and emphasizing strong relationships. Overt conflict was rare, with resolution occurring quietly and in private. Employees were unskilled in conflict management and so often did not speak up, resulting in organizational silence, where significant problems were unaddressed. In this situation, silence was due to precedent and religious beliefs. Religious organizations may be particularly susceptible to NLs (Ball & Puls, 2015). Such organizations value compliance which provides opportunity for abuse. Narcissists are drawn to compliant people, especially if such a group is willing to pay a salary. Ball and Puls (2015) found one in three pastors of one denomination to have Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Narcissism is defined as a deep need for admiration and positive attention, an excessive sense of one’s importance, and a notable lack of empathy (Gebauer, Sedikides, Verplanken, & Maio, 2012). Within an organization, a narcissist is unable to accept and accurately apply free flowing social feedback, responds selectively and positively to agreement and support, and reacts harshly and punitively to criticism and differences of opinion. In this manner, and by virtue of their position, narcissistic leaders tend to create a milieu in which they only receive positive feedback.

Recruitment Issues: The Perfect Storm This faith-based international nonprofit needed a new CEO when the incumbent gave a one-year notice. At 60 years of age, the organization had about 450 employees in more than 25 countries. The Board of Directors quickly commenced the recruitment process. A poorly vetted consultant. With little experience in executive hiring, the Board engaged a faith-based consultant to assist in the search process. Apparently his track record was not examined and he appeared to operate without much supervision. The consultant began the process with one candidate in mind, Devon, referencing him in glowing terms from the outset. A Board of Directors in transition. Concurrently, the Board had completed two steps in the process of transitioning to a policy governance model. Without

1

All names used in the case are pseudonyms.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing    115 the remaining step of establishing measurable organizational goals there was no process to assess the organization, its leader, or the Board against defined goals. Moreover, there was no code of ethics or whistle blower policy. As the Search Committee was constituted, the Governance Committee, responsible for the transition to policy governance, was suspended. One year after Devon’s appointment the Governance Committee remained suspended and with no defined process to evaluate Devon. In a final mis-step, Devon’s credentials were not adequately scrutinized. Later it was learned that Devon’s representation of previous accomplishments was not congruent with narratives of former colleagues. However, Devon had a top-notch academic record and knew how to woo those around him; thus, his self-reports were persuasive. In events resembling a perfect storm, the Search Committee, the Board, and their recruiter were captivated by Devon’s charisma and personality. Believing his self-promoting narrative, impressed by his work history, and overly reliant on the recruiter, the Board appointed Devon as CEO.

The Trajectory of Devon’s Governance Devon’s start date included a three month overlap to provide time to “learn the ropes.” It was reported that Devon never approached the outgoing CEO, instead working alone.

Initial Romance of Leadership At the subsequent organizational convention, Devon was formally introduced and received many high marks. He seemed visionary, charismatic, outgoing, and outspoken. He publicly flattered and praised existing leaders, spent time with individuals, and outlined impressive goals to expand the organization’s work. Devon seemed generous: as he talked about books he liked, he offered to buy them for others, and he treated the entire organization to ice cream, with his assistant quietly wondering about finances. For the careful observer, however, cracks were already evident. Devon publicly compared himself to an example in Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink, describing his innate intuition. Employees who read the book, compliments of Devon, learned that intuition was not innate but developed through experience, knowledge, and training. Changing organizational direction. In an initial address, Devon outlined significant shifts in organizational focus and strategy. He envisioned creating new, independent work among minorities. New ideas and works were generally valued, yet many employees voiced consternation at abandoning well-established partnerships. Yet Devon was adamant, repeatedly emphasizing that anyone not joining him would be left behind. It became increasingly clear: his way was the only way. During another address, as Devon provided additional details for future plans, he suggested changing the mission and vision statements, a Board responsibility. Everyone was caught off guard as Devon proposed immediate alterations and, following a slight pause, continued as if the changes were official.

116    Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski Conforming to the new statements, Devon hired a so-called expert to train employees in new methods. The expert had never lived internationally and their purported successes were not found to be sustainable. Worse, in training sessions, the expert spoke of a geographical phenomenon which was blatantly fabricated. Consistent with organizational silence, there was no pushback. Devon referenced the concept, demonstrating his support and bolstering his status. Flattening the organization. From the outset, Devon contended that the organization was excessively hierarchical. In reality, the organization had four levels with one decision-making body, the Region-Wide Team (RWT). The structure was scarcely as hierarchical as Devon maintained and most found that it worked well. During an initial tour of some worksites, Devon promoted flattening the organization and, in an egregious move, referred to a senior director as “that fat person.” Such language was not acceptable, yet his harassment was tacitly tolerated. In his first two months, Devon eliminated the positions directly below him, thus moving toward his goal of consolidating power. In removing these influential senior leaders, Devon simultaneously appropriated their power and removed those most able to resist his maneuvers.

Faltering Romance Cracks in the facade became more apparent as Devon consolidated power by sidelining dissenters, reducing the RWT to a rubber stamp council, manipulating the board, and repeatedly changing increasingly expansive organizational goals. The combination of lofty organizational goals, staff desires for accomplishment, and narcissistic traits created the ideal conditions for a NL to flourish (Kellerman, 2004). Removing all critique. After removing the highest level of leadership, Devon began replacing RWT members with passive followers, thus repurposing the RWT to a personal advisory team. Sally, an RWT member, shared her opinions even when disagreeing with Devon. Soon, each time she spoke, Devon bullied her by saying, “Oh, it’s Sally again.” Sally was initially told that her appointment to the RWT occurred because having only one female on the RWT didn’t look good. But her experience in top leadership levels was commensurate with the role. Soon after she critiqued one of Devon’s moves, she learned that her responsibilities had changed and she was now a “co-leader” with another man. Effectively she was sidelined: the man received all communications and attended all leadership meetings. Next, Patty was added without specific responsibilities, or the requisite personal or professional experience. This move was viewed with curiosity until Patty’s husband related voicing some critical comments in Devon’s presence. When Patty heard of it, she was aghast, compelling her husband to apologize. Seemingly, Devon perceived her as an uncritical supporter, the only leadership credential needed.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing    117 Fundamentally, Devon’s perception of being challenged was the litmus test for dismissal, and women seemed particularly vulnerable. Another woman, also an RWT member, disagreed with the abrupt ousting of a department leader and was herself abruptly dismissed. Roberta, who led a women’s ministry, attempted to talk with Devon but was told Devon’s wife would handle women’s issues. Later Roberta asked to be included on the RWT since women constituted two-thirds of the organization. Devon refused, but claimed publicly that she had declined his invitation to join the RWT. Simon, Roberta’s husband and RWT member, attempted to correct the false narrative. Eventually it became clear that Devon expected Simon’s loyalty despite lies regarding Roberta; Simon eventually resigned from the RWT. Later Roberta was moved to a leadership role in Professional Development (PD), and again questioned one of Devon’s decisions. Subsequently two RWT members, at Devon’s behest, informed the PD team that funding had been withdrawn, ostensibly due to misalignment between training sessions and Devon’s new mission statement. Roberta clarified that no training had occurred since the mission statement’s revision and it would be incorporated in future training. One RWT member conceded this point; notwithstanding, Devon’s wishes were implemented, leading to the demise of the department. The arbitrary confiscation of grant funds PD had received was not admissible financial practice. Men who joined the RWT also learned that the slightest opposition was problematic. Some leaders readily became acquiescent followers, agreeing even when things were illogical, as on the PD call. Those pressing for other perspectives were ousted from the RWT or they resigned when they understood Devon’s lack of tolerance for independent thought. Devon’s cyclical pattern of relating to employees was to promote a person as an ideal employee until they displeased him for whatever reason. Then Devon would reverse course and apply pressure until they resigned. For example, RWT member David worked in a specialized field in which Devon was interested. Devon told David that he could issue the invitations for a conference about his specialty and David clearly said he did not want to include Devon’s so-called expert due to a divergence in approach. Devon overruled and the expert attended. Now, David was in Devon’s crosshairs. Peter, David’s supervisor and an RWT member, had always given him excellent reviews. Peter scheduled a meeting with David and Devon but refused to divulge its purpose. Charlie, another RWT member who two days prior had given David his full trust, also attended. Devon began asking about David’s work and David described the positive expansion. Devon then began a litany of David’s supposed poor performance. When he finished, Devon demanded that Charlie and Peter support him, which they did, though their accusations had not been voiced previously. In conclusion, David’s title was removed. Months later, Devon wrote to David’s subordinates, removing David as leader and appropriating the role. One of David’s employees, shocked, forwarded the email to David. Devon’s stated rationale was that David needed to work in his area of specialty. Devon also promised to find a suitable position, but he never did.

118    Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski Manipulating the Board of Directors. David’s growing work had interested Carl, a Board member. Carl offered David guidance and support, traveling with David and telling others of David’s significant role. When Devon learned of the growing relationship, he invited Carl on a trip. At the following convention, Carl attended for a few days but refused to meet with David. After his departure, Carl’s new role as Chairman of the Board was announced. Carl’s contact with David abruptly stopped. Two days later David had the fateful meeting with Devon, Peter, and Charlie. Another Board member met privately with David and described Devon as a liar to explain his own resignation from the Board. In flattening the organization, Devon made himself the only direct channel of communication between the Board and the organization. Employees later learned that Devon told success stories to the Board while employees discussed the lack of progress on many fronts. Shifting organizational goals. Devon created new, loftier organizational goals about every six months. At one point, Devon announced the founding of two new churches, yet subsequent information indicated each had met only once. Still, Devon embraced them as successes aligned with organizational goals. Privately, Carl remarked that calling these gatherings “churches” diminished the organization. Contrary to standard practice, metrics focused on processes, not outcomes. When it was obvious that current goals were unattainable within their timeframe, Devon rallied the troops by arousing excitement with new goals and timeframes. The pattern became cyclical. As leaders recognized the organizational upheaval, some decided to keep their heads down and act as a buffer for their subordinates. Others left. Devon’s dictatorial style and treatment of personnel was the antithesis of the traditional organizational leadership style and unmistakably counter to their faith practice.

Final Destruction of the Romance After seven years, Devon abruptly resigned, leaving the organization with many scars. Personnel decreased by approximately 30%; program services income dropped over 40%. Nontangible scars were deep. Brain drain was significant as many leaders resigned and new personnel were inexperienced. Once a tight-knit organization, many felt deeply the loss of close friends and colleagues. Throughout, the Board never established evaluative goals. Despite private consternation, collectively the Board continued to support Devon’s unrealistic goals and, at times, illegal treatment of employees. Board voice and power were lost with a lack of governance. Devon’s sole focus on his pet projects, mining other budgets and grants for funding, and the cyclical pattern of goals and personnel damaged the entire organization. Some long-term projects and relationships were ignored, while others received less funding. Broken promises resulted in a decrease of trust with long-term partners and the loss of new partnerships.

Analysis of the Toxic Triangle and the Faith Component Various scholars have investigated bad leadership. Using Systems Theory, Padilla et al. (2007) offer the best explanation for the events presented here.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing    119 They described destructive leadership as the confluence of “destructive leaders,” “susceptible followers,” and a “conducive environment.” While Devon displayed many traits of a destructive leader, he did not operate in a vacuum; the faith-based organization enabled and abetted his behavior. Ministries may appeal to narcissists as they provide ready followers (Ball & Puls, 2015). For many of the dysfunctions described by Padilla et al., there is a faithbased corollary pushed upon adherents by naive leaders or those with ulterior motives. In this section, we discuss each side of Padilla et al.’s (2007) triangle and analyze its interaction with faith-based organizations (Fig. 1).

Destructive Leader Padilla et al.’s (2007) first side of the triangle is destructive leaders. Qualities they describe in such leaders include desire for power, charisma, and narcissism. Devon was a prime example. As a destructive leader, Devon knew well the trappings of faith important to those in the faith community. He knew the spiritual vocabulary, could discuss theology and quote the Bible, and was outwardly friendly. These helped him appear as an egalitarian leader, viewed as a Servant Leader. These outward-facing characteristics were interpreted as spiritual qualities – a high value in the context.

Fig. 1. The Toxic Triangle and Its Constituent Parts. Reprinted from Padilla et al. (2007, p. 180) with permission from Elsevier.

120    Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski However, Devon’s actions demonstrated that these were not core values. He denigrated people, as in his “fat person” comment. He was consumed by power, pulling it to himself through flattening the organization and unilateral decisionmaking, as in changing the mission and vision statements. His process with David and others isolated them while he tried to create an egalitarian and friendly atmosphere with others. From his position of power, he undercut other opinions, such as his bullying of Sally. He was as dismissive of women as he was of men who voiced any critique whatsoever. Women on the RWT were merely tokens, not taken seriously as leaders. Keeping women segregated from men and reducing their influence is a way of defining who belongs to the faith community (Sowinska, 2007). Viewing women as supporters of male authority rather than leaders is a common, sexist attitude (Dzubinski, 2016). Devon capitalized on both premises, adding and removing women from leadership roles based on their apparent deference to him. Multiple best practices and some laws were ignored and there was no true concern for those he stepped on. Devon was focused on maintaining and polishing his image. The smallest critique could result in dismissal. Those whose success or capacity could potentially diminish his image were removed from their work.

Susceptible Followers Padilla et al.’s (2007) second side of the toxic triangle is “susceptible followers” divided into “conformers” meaning unquestioning followers, and “colluders” who follow for personal gain (p. 180). Followers attempting to blend in do so out of “unmet basic needs, negative self-evaluations, and psychological immaturity” while colluders are “ambitious, selfish and share the destructive leader’s world views” (Padilla et al., 2007, p. 183). Many, if not most, of the employees appeared to be conformers rather than colluders. Keeping their role was necessary for emotional and psychological reasons. While expatriate employees (90+% of staff) commonly learn to fulfill their physiological and safety needs, belonging needs, such as social support, are frequently unmet (Navara & James, 2002). Relatively few expatriates are fully incorporated into the national culture. Thus, most are relegated to “otherness,” living outside of the mainstream and viewing other expatriates as an ethnic enclave or substitute family (Cohen, 1977). This important function of inclusion was manipulated by Devon as he told others to join or be left behind, and isolating those who displeased him. Psychological aspects of intercultural adjustment are related to one’s faith (Hall, Edwards, & Hall, 2006). Employees’ dichotomistic view of faith membership made it difficult for them to fully embrace those of different faith persuasions (i.e., 95% of their communities). Shared cultural and spiritual heritage within the organization often met belonging needs. For some, the annual convention was a social highlight. Additionally, maintaining group membership was highly valued. These views were normalized by comparison with similar faith-based nonprofits, although if viewed in isolation their problematic nature becomes clear.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing    121 Self-esteem needs are often unmet in faith communities, because the repetitive assertion of sinfulness outweighs the equally true statement of forgiveness. Devon’s expert imposed a program which suited a few who aligned with Devon’s quick-change plans. Most employees preferred the previous structure’s pursuit of long-term partnerships, thus never meeting the ever-changing goals. Blame was turned inwards leaving self-esteem needs unfulfilled. People with an external locus of control are more likely to yield to a powerful leader who will guide them (Padilla et al., 2007). Within this faith community, the will of God served as a beacon: following God’s will clearly implied they were not in complete control. Yet, rule-followers are capable of aberrant behavior. David experienced this when Peter and Charlie blindly obeyed. Devon’s assistant sought funds from unrelated budgets and used restricted funds improperly. Padilla et al. (2007) summarized that “psychological maturity is needed to oppose destructive leadership” (p. 184). The few who stood up to Devon swiftly became personae non gratae. Compounding the situation were faith teachings of compliance and high power distance, emphasized to the exclusion of other concepts in the Bible. In fall 2019, one of the authors listened to a pastor explain that when followers submitted to a leader (even one that made them cringe) they were obeying God. According to that pastor, anyone failing to submit was offending God, as whatever a leader does (right or wrong) is between them and God. In this view, a leader is accountable to no-one and confronting them constitutes rebellion. This interpretation disregards justice and fairness in the Bible by requiring all to follow, apparently blindly. Although many faith heroes throughout Christian history resisted unjust leadership, this conformance mindset provides no encouragement to emulate them. Colluders (Padilla et al., 2007) join the destructive leader in questionable behavior as there is potential to benefit personally. Peter and Charlie were not alone in negating publicly espoused values to comply with Devon’s requests. Having acquiesced once they were called upon multiple times. The RWT members who closed PD while knowing that their rationale was invalid also acted as colluders, apparently in order to preserve their positions. In this nonprofit, the large majority of people were compliant which was, to some extent, an outworking of the theology they were taught. Colluders were relatively rare, but unsurprisingly, clustered in leadership positions.

Conducive Environment The third requirement necessary for destructive leadership to occur is an appropriate environment. Padilla et al. (2007) proposed four environmental factors facilitating destructive leadership: “instability, perceived threat, cultural values, and absence of checks and balances” (p. 185). Instability. An organization already unstable from previous leadership became precarious with Devon’s precipitous moves changing foundational statements and flattening the organization. Additionally, Devon verbally created a perception of instability by declaring the organization had no leadership potential, thus justifying fast and bold steps taken without consultation. Furthermore, by staying one

122    Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski step ahead of everyone else Devon was able to proceed unilaterally, leaving others unsure about the next step. Perceived threat. Devon created a number of alternative narratives within the organization, creating a sense of deficiency: the organization was too hierarchical, without leadership potential or vision. Whereas there were no overt statements regarding perceived threats, the perception of serious instability could have been viewed as threatening. Cultural values. Faith-based groups with strong Calvinistic tendencies are focused on in-groups and out-groups. Specific parameters delineating the boundaries of belonging may have little to do with belief, such as dress in the Amish community. Similarly, this nonprofit had prescribed behaviors; violations such as financial mismanagement, and ethical or moral transgression could result in dismissal. As the leader, Devon saw himself – and to a degree was treated as – above these behavioral guidelines. Had he been an employee, his behavior, if scrutinized, would have resulted in dismissal. However, Devon continued to act with impunity. Absence of checks and balances. Organizations without checks and balances have no established mechanism to correct a power grab so are prone to abuse (Padilla et al., 2007). Devon happened upon a changing Board structure without measures to evaluate his performance. In conversation, Board members initially indicated little impetus to confront Devon. Although agreeing with analyses demonstrating Devon’s harm to the organization, some Board members remained silent in Board meetings, thus breaching their Board responsibilities. Organizational silence, originally due to faith beliefs but later compounded with safety issues, was a key factor in Devon’s success. There were isolated protests which Devon eliminated effectively and swiftly as a lesson to others. Fear was also a key factor (Morrison & Milliken, 2000) with Devon’s fragile self-image and fear of negative feedback. Employees were afraid of being shamed in front of others or removed from their positions. Compliance was also rooted in fear of repercussions for actions such as breaking group norms by speaking out or standing up to leadership. The hiring of high-level leaders from outside the organization also reinforced this silence (Morrison & Milliken, 2000). Another strong force was the organization’s conception of faith and how it bolstered this destructive leader. Actions were given a spiritual overlay and subdued many well-meaning adherents. Work discussions were treated as gossip and constructive criticism was labeled insubordination. In the organization’s environment, even the slightest deviation could be viewed suspiciously. In a workshop, one employee told his small group he believed the expert spied on people to determine allegiance to Devon.

Lessons Learned Organizational Lessons Organizations need to have, and adhere to, a clear and strong form of governance. Narcissists often resist accountability through overriding or charming others; standing firm in prescribed processes is essential.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing    123 Boards must act quickly as situations degenerate. Without public Board communication people created their own narrative. Some surmised that the Board resisted the changing of foundational statements; however, many believed the Board had capitulated. Organizations need to have, and practice, mechanisms to evaluate the CEO. Board members should have organizational health as their top priority, and not their personal image. Some Board members were conflicted, not wanting to speak negatively about Devon in front of Board members who they felt were more powerful or popular. Executive recruiters must be thoroughly vetted prior to hiring. The Board or Search Committee should monitor the process and potential candidates. Every organization must have a whistleblower policy or confidential complaint mechanism. Most employees had no safe process by which to voice their concerns. The head of Human Resources has a key role in maintaining the integrity of the organization. This individual should be capable of standing firm for legal realities. Similarly, the CFO should forcefully counter any attempt to bypass sound financial practice. Should the CEO persist in sidestepping accepted financial process, the CFO should report it to the Board – otherwise they remain personally liable. When a CEO becomes the only link between the Board and employees, the Board should seek other sources of information. Many organizations are wary of hiring narcissists; however, they should also be wary of employing many rule-followers or complacent individuals. Despite all efforts an organization could hire a covert narcissist, often not easily identified, and a preponderance of compliant personalities provides a conducive environment for destructive leadership. Faith-based organizations need to understand and structurally avoid the power plays which some have couched in religious terms. An initial step would be a significant study and analysis of power structures and faith.

Group Lessons Groups should understand that meeting without the leader present is commonplace. Conversation about work does not necessarily constitute gossip. This is particularly important for faith-based groups. Voicing opinions and critiques should not result in being removed from one’s position. Group members observing such behavior should be on the alert. Leaders complying with the destructive leader may encounter resistance from their subordinates. The number of people following a NL is not indicative of the quality of the leader, but rather the internal needs of the followers. Faith-based organizations expect that leadership will be truthful. Narcissists use alternative narratives in order to achieve their ends. Do not be surprised if a NL looks straight at you and blatantly lies. Triangulate information with others to determine the truth. Power is amassed by NLs through information flow – they amass information and parcel it out piecemeal depending on the hearer. Spread information laterally,

124    Ruth Beck and Leanne Dzubinski copy others on your emails – increasing everyone’s information blunts this type of manipulation. Narcissists may try to control the narrative by endless talking, whether it be in a Q&A session or a lunch break. It is not unspiritual to interrupt. There is strength in groups – do not meet alone with a NL. With others in the room, there is corroboration for a realistic view of events. Depending on who is present, the narcissist will oftentimes modify their behavior.

Individual Lessons Those choosing to resist and not empower the destructive leader should anticipate that standing up for what is right will become more difficult. When they try to use their own voice, they may well be sidelined. Individuals caught up in a negative spiral with a narcissistic leader need support. Find someone to talk with freely, whether inside or outside the organization. This can serve as a reality check. What are the alternative narratives which are being promoted? Alternative narratives are disorienting – conversation with others can offer a balanced point of view. Understand how faith relates to leadership and the level of control which leadership can assume, as well as appropriate response. This could include discussions with clergy, a spiritual director, a faith-based counselor, or other supportive outsider. Plan an exit strategy in case it is needed. Was the situation of Devon and the faith-based nonprofit organization a perfect storm? There were some fortuitous factors from Devon’s perspective such as the Board transition. However, such factors, coupled with Devon’s narcissism, were not sufficient to create the damage which ensued. Fundamentally, the largest factor was the focus on compliance collectively and individually. In this particular situation, compliance appeared compelling as an alternative narrative according to one interpretation of faith. This faith-based compliance created a perfect window of opportunity for Devon, or any narcissistic leader. Additionally, this view of faith reinforced organizational silence giving Devon complete freedom. Employees’ particular interpretation of the Bible left them ill-prepared to face the challenge within their ranks, much less those challenges outside their faith circle.

Conclusion Although the situation in this faith-based nonprofit was dire, it provides ample lessons for organizations, groups, and individuals. These are provided to spark change leading to less compliant followers who, in turn, create a less conducive environment. While unable to change a destructive leader, shortening the other two sides of the toxic triangle decreases the space in which a NL can maneuver.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing    125

References Ball, R. G., & Puls, D. (2015). Frequency of narcissistic personality disorder in pastors: A preliminary study. Paper presented at the American Association of Christian Counselors, Nashville, TN. Cohen, E. (1977). Expatriate communities. Current Sociology, 24(3), 5–90. https:// doi.org/10.1177/001139217702400301 Dzubinski, L. M. (2016). Taking on power: Women leaders in evangelical mission organizations. Missiology: An International Review, 44(3), 281–295. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0091829615583732 Gebauer, J. E., Sedikides, C., Verplanken, B., & Maio, G. R. (2012). Communal narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 854–878. https://doi.org/10.1037/ a0029629 Hall, M. E., Edwards, K. J., & Hall, T. W. (2006). The role of spiritual and psychological development in the cross-cultural adjustment of missionaries. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 9(2), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/13694670500355262 Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706–725. Navara, G. S., & James, S. (2002). Sojourner adjustment: Does missionary status affect acculturation? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26(6), 695–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(02)00042-1 Padilla, A., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2007). The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive environments. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 176–194. Sowinska, A. (2007). Ambiguous women: Debates within American evangelical feminism. European Journal of American Culture, 26(3), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1386/ ejac.26.3.167/1

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 12

When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain Terry Fernsler Abstract Founder’s syndrome is when one individual holds disproportionate power and influence in an organization. It is not limited to the founder of an organization and can be found particularly in dominant and charismatic organizational leaders. While the nonprofit leader in this case was not a founder, he was highly charismatic and was granted as much authority as a founder. He became reluctant to share power, even when it was clear he needed help to build the capacity of the organization. The board of directors did not feel it necessary to check the executive director’s power because he had been so successful in growing the organization up to a point. When it was discovered he was having an inappropriate affair with a subordinate employee, however, the board did ask him to resign. Yet it allowed him to name his successor, and accepted the executive director’s nomination of the employee with whom he had an affair. Board and staff of nonprofit organizations have obligations to act in good faith in the governance of the organization and to enforce the duties of care and obligation. This requires transparent communication. Without two-way symmetrical communication maintained throughout the organization, this executive director abused the power granted him for his own gain. Keywords: Founder’s syndrome; charismatic leadership; leader power; accountability; transparency; nonprofit executive

When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 127–137 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211012

128    Terry Fernsler

Introduction Founder’s syndrome (Block, 2004; Mathiasen, 1983) is when one individual holds disproportionate power and influence in a nonprofit organization. Block and Rosenberg (2002) suggested that founder’s syndrome is not limited to the original founder of an organization; it can be evidenced in a particularly dominant executive director, especially when the board of directors cedes power to a charismatic leader and the success of the organization is wrapped up in the personality of the leader. Fast, Sivanathan, Mayer, and Galinsky (2012) found that power is like an elixir that surges through the brain, leading to the tendency to overestimate the accuracy of personal knowledge. When that dominant character allows power to control his or her ego, he or she discounts the legitimate views of others, losing sight of what leadership means. In effective nonprofit organizations, the executive director and the board of directors govern collaboratively (Chait, Ryan, & Taylor, 2011). This means that policy and responsibilities are mutually developed and enforced. If a charismatic executive director is granted too much power, it is up to the board of directors to check that power. In the following case, an executive director who took his organization to a new level of operation and was permitted disproportionate influence due to his charisma ignored a conflict of interest policy. The board of directors failed to govern appropriately. As a result, the reputation of the organization could have been seriously damaged.

The Organization The organization was a small Habitat for Humanity affiliate in a western United States county of about 100,000 residents. Habitat for Humanity International is an international nonprofit organization that encourages communities to create local organizations affiliated with it. They are called affiliates rather than chapters because these local groups are fairly autonomous, but must meet certain standards to use the brand and remain affiliated with Habitat for Humanity International. Habitat for Humanity is an ecumenical, Christian-based nonprofit that relies largely on volunteers and contributions to build new homes for low-income families who otherwise would not be able to purchase a home. As a Christian, faithbased organization, this affiliate, like most affiliates, did not discriminate when seeking volunteers or when selecting partner families. However, its connections to religious congregations helped garner support. Congregations would sometimes sponsor a home, providing most of the volunteer labor and funding for the materials. This Habitat for Humanity affiliate had managed as a volunteer organization until the board of directors decided to hire a recently retired executive, Pete, from an international corporation that exerted economic and historic influence in the region. Pete’s connections that he gained in his years at the company helped him acquire in-kind contributions (such as building materials at a discount or free) and donations once he was at the Habitat for Humanity affiliate. He was able to garner support sufficient to begin a 10-home build site. This was far more houses than the affiliate had ever before been able handle simultaneously in the past.

When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain    129 Reliance by Habitat for Humanity affiliates on volunteers is high, even by nonprofit standards. Volunteers were used not only for construction purposes, but also for fundraising, publicity, family support, family selection, and even administrative and legal tasks. There were volunteer opportunities for almost anyone who wanted to participate. These many stakeholders and a fairly vulnerable service population established a high bar of accountability (Grobman, 2018). Selected families partnered with the Habitat for Humanity affiliate by volunteering 500 hours before they could move into their Habitat for Humanity built home. By working in partnership with Habitat for Humanity and investing in the building process, partner families gained self-reliance, self-esteem, and new homemaintenance skills while earning decent, affordable housing. The homes were sold to partner families through a no-interest loan by Habitat for Humanity, based on expenses for the cost of material, land, and any professional services needed to meet building code. Construction was typical of any new house – all permits and codes (state, county and municipal), had to be met. The Habitat for Humanity affiliate worked with partner families to design the home to meet their particular needs, using one of a number of suggested designs as a basis. The affiliate acquired material and set regular workdays for construction. Volunteer recruitment was ongoing, for both the construction and support activities, and all committee activities. At the time of this case, this Habitat for Humanity affiliate had three employees: an executive director, a construction manager, and a newly hired development director. In addition, an office administrator volunteered three days a week because Pete preferred working on the construction site than in the office. All committees were volunteer-run at the Habitat for Humanity affiliate. While the executive director was to serve on all committees, Pete rarely needed to attend committee meetings, and rarely did. In fact, he often felt it unnecessary to attend even the board of directors meetings.

Organizational Growth The energy Pete generated led to a desire by the board to increase funding and inkind esources to sustain and grow the success the organization was having under Pete: The Habitat for Humanity affiliate agreed to participated in a fundraising training that Habitat for Humanity International offered affiliates. The expense of the training and hotel space were paid by Habitat for Humanity International. Affiliates made their own investment by paying for travel expenses to and from the training. The affiliate board decided to send three representatives from the affiliate: Pete, the chair of the board of directors, and a yet-to-be-hired development director. The development director’s first responsibility, therefore, was to accompany the other two representatives to the training and then lead in the fundraising initiative’s implementation at the affiliate. Pete felt the training was a waste of time and that the Development Director could just go out and ask for support, particularly from foundations. The board, however, believed that fundraising was one of Pete’s weaknesses, which is why it decided to create a development director position in the first place. This was the

130    Terry Fernsler first time the board urged Pete to share his responsibilities and try to strengthen his skills. Mark, the Board Chair, was the City Attorney for the largest city in the county. In addition to his positional power, he held moral and persuasive power. While Pete was charismatic and could talk up a storm, Mark was more thoughtful, more soft-spoken and quicker on his feet (he was a lawyer, after all). Mark was more emotionally intelligent and less narcissistic than Pete, but Pete’s charisma won over many supporters to the affiliate. The board of directors admired Mark greatly, and most people in the community did as well. When he made a decision, you knew it was well reasoned and a sound decision. For example, when he decided the fundraising training would be a good investment for the organization, the board got behind it. Mark, who had served on boards of directors of nonprofit organizations previously, sensed this board needed to govern and oversee the activities of the executive director to a greater extent. As a lawyer, he knew the board of directors was legally accountable to the public. The new Development Director had no voice in the selection of the fundraising model because it was made prior to his involvement with the affiliate; Pete did not tell him of the training until the Development Director was hired. The Development Director initially had some skepticism about it himself; most trainings he had received in past positions were little more than sales pitches for the services of consultants of particular methods. He did not voice his reservations, however, being so new to the organization. After going through the training he was convinced that it could succeed at the Habitat for Humanity affiliate. He organized a development committee to plan and manage the activities in the initiative. Following the training, Mark was so sold on the technique he committed two board members to the new development committee created by the Development Director to plan and oversee the initiative implementing the fundraising model. He kept close tabs on the committee through these two board members. The two board members appointed by Mark included Jon, the chair of the committee. Jon was a former mayor of a smaller city in the county. Jon, like Mark, was also a person of high integrity and highly respected. He was committed to the mission of the Habitat for Humanity affiliate and really wanted the initiative to work. He served on the board of directors as Vice Chair. Mark also appointed Sandy, who was highly organized. She was appointed to add a voice of skepticism about the fundraising method. However, after a short time, as she saw the enthusiasm of the rest of the committee and how well the program was being managed, she became very engaged in the planning process herself and turned out to be skilled at planning publicity. The Development Director relied on Sandy to make sure all the details were considered. Of the other volunteers on the committee, one, Melinda had years of fundraising experience and some inflexible thoughts about how fundraising should be conducted. Several members of the development committee had difficulty working with Melinda, so the Development Director frequently had to serve as a buffer between her and those members, which he adroitly accomplished simply by giving Melinda the attention she craved. The Development Director would occasionally push back against Melinda’s inflexibility, but generally felt her incessant

When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain    131 questions actually resulted in a very-well planned campaign. Betty, the office manager, volunteered for the committee, and the last committee member, apart from the Development Director himself, was a high school senior who needed to complete an internship before graduating from high school and heading to college. She was very passionate about Habitat for Humanity and brought a fresh perspective to the affiliate. Becky, the student, had many connections at her high school and although admitted to the Development Director that she did not always understand the discussions at the committee meetings, she learned much and ended up recruiting many volunteers from her high school’s Key Club. It was a somewhat rag-tag ad hoc committee that the Development Director was able to coordinate well and on which he insisted all participate. The fundraising model involved cultivating relationships with prospective and current supporters for the long term. The affiliate’s ten-house building site served as a unique opportunity to demonstrate how homes developed from the foundation to a completed house through guided tours. The completed home housed a family who had already moved into it and quite willing to explain to tour participants the difference the organization made in people’s lives. In spite of his displeasure with the new method to raise money, Pete filled a perfect role in the model. Since he was nearly always found on the construction site anyway, it was easy to get him to lead tours – he could explain the organization’s history better than anyone, and was a dynamic speaker. He enjoyed the attention and meeting people. His participation in the model dampened his opposition to it; although Mark’s strong commitment to making it work also encouraged Pete’s participation. The fundraising model was successful for the Habitat for Humanity affiliate because of diligent follow-up with tour participants. Over the course of ten months, voluntarism, which was vigorous before, tripled. Volunteers were encouraged to participate in many ways and ongoing partnerships developed with local building suppliers. The effort culminated in a fundraising breakfast event in which nearly 400 people attended. The breakfast netted just over $150,000 its first year, a total almost unheard of for a fundraiser in the community. Things seemed to be going well for the Habitat for Humanity affiliate. Financial and in-kind resources increased, voluntarism tripled, and more families could be served. One day shortly after the breakfast event, Jon asked the Development Director if he had heard any rumors about public displays of affection between Pete – who was married at the time – and the Construction Manager he hired, Lori. The Development Director had not heard anything about it and had no reason to suspect it could have been happening since he and Pete rarely spoke. The Development Director spent most of his time in the office or visiting prospective contributors while Pete spent his time at the construction site. It turned out the reason Jon asked was because he had found Pete and Lori in a compromising position behind one of the houses at the building site one day. He decided the other directors needed to know and took the matter to the board. With Pete’s supervisory role of Lori, it could create a conflict of interest. Conflicts of interest in nonprofit organizations relate to the duty of loyalty by key stakeholders of the organization, including the chief executive.

132    Terry Fernsler As representatives of the organization, they are expected to exercise power in the interest of the organization, not for personal gain (Hopkins & Gross, 2010). When personal interests conflict with organizational interests, board member, staff, and volunteer activities must be managed in the interests of the organization (BoardSource, 2007). A few members of the board admitted they were already aware of Pete’s and Lori’s affair, but had not raised the issue to the rest of the board. When the full board found out about the affair, Pete was asked to resign immediately because intimate relations between the executive director and staff could clearly lead to conflict of interest. Pete had not been transparent with the board, violating a written conflict of interest policy that required full disclosure of potential conflicts. In addition, as a Christian organization, an extra-marital affair violated the ethics of most stakeholders. However, pressure by Pete’s supporters led to the board asking Pete to name his successor. Pete urged that Lori replace him, and the board accepted, hoping that an immediate replacement during the crisis of a sudden executive director termination would be easier with someone familiar with the organization. Although Lori did not have all the necessary skills to manage the organization, Pete would still have a connection to and influence in the organization. The Development Director, who had successfully led the effort to increase revenue and voluntarism in only one year, resigned immediately after Lori was named Executive Director, citing ethical reasons. Lori lasted only a few months as Executive Director, resigning in a sudden expression of morality after Pete divorced and quickly thereafter married Lori. Board members who covered up the affair were replaced and the organization eventually found more transparent staff and recruited new board members more willing to follow their obligation to keep informed about the organization’s activities, participate in decision-making rather than ceding governance decisions to the chief executive, and act in good faith for the benefit of the organization (Hopkins & Gross, 2010). Thanks primarily to the high reputation of Habitat for Humanity affiliates everywhere and the local affiliate’s board of directors successfully suppressing public knowledge about the affair, the organization recovered eventually, but without the fundraising success it once had.

Lessons from the Case Charismatic dominant executive director. Founder’s syndrome is characterized by a charismatic leader with legitimate power (power gained through title and position in an organization). Extraordinary personal presence distinguishes charismatic people from others. This typically includes physical appearance and powers of speech (Greenwald, 2008), and Pete had both. People who are charismatic leaders rely on the qualities of being good communicators, prestige, or significant achievements to their credit. Their influence can make charismatic leaders appear to transform an organization. However, legitimate power will sometimes lead to a desire for personal gain. The test of true charisma is whether the individual represents something beyond him or herself. Concern for others is the distinctive

When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain    133 feature delineating true transformational leaders from pseudo-transformational ones. The difference between a transformational and pseudo-transformational leader is whether charisma is used to benefit the organization or the individual leader him- or herself (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). Bass and Avolio (1994) found charisma a necessary but not sufficient ingredient for transformational leadership. In other words, being charismatic does not mean a leader will be able to transform an organization. Obedience to the charismatic authority figure may help team members overlook where the leader’s interests primarily lie, especially if the figure’s personality is closely entwined with organizational identity, as can occur with executive directors of small nonprofit organizations. Charismatic people make a strong initial impression and are chosen for leader positions, but often fail because of overwhelming arrogance (Paulhaus, 1998) which may reflect insecurity about their abilities. For example, Pete seemed to be aware that his administrative skills were not strong and compensated by avoiding the office and committee meetings. Pete was able to make a strong first impression when the board of directors hired him, but his reliance on power over others was an attempt to mask his shortcomings. Sometimes pseudo-transformational leaders create unnecessary crises. They feel that the bottom is about to fall out of life, so they run from one emergency to another, and may even create them (such as by ignoring correspondence and meetings). Such individuals carry out virtually all everyday tasks with a sense of high drama. They like to live in a state of high alert and seem to relish being called upon to fix all those problems that are causing the crisis (Fusco & Freeman, 2007) drawing more focus to themselves. Pete was reactive to problems, not proactive, and then complained about the pressures of being the executive director. As others, such as Betty, staff, and the board of directors began to increase their responsibilities in order to be proactive, continual crisis management could no longer work for Pete to maintain authority. Many founders exercise paternalistic, autocratic, overzealous, and opaque leadership, making it difficult for other stakeholders to fully understand the organization. To deal with founders’ syndrome and ensure smooth operations Muriithi and Wachira (2016) recommend developing strong all-inclusive leadership, building employees’ capacity to attain desired competence, practicing professionalism, establishing workable structures, and succession planning mechanisms. Pete had formed his own little domain at the organization, as many executives of small nonprofits do in the name of efficiency. Pete was a person of action, not talk, and was so frequently at the construction site away from the office that a volunteer, Betty, agreed to be the office manager to prevent correspondence from languishing. Pete preferred putting out the “fires” at the construction site. He wanted to be the homebuilding “fixer,” and felt imposed upon when the board hired someone to help with fundraising, a weakness of Pete. Indeed, instead of developing a new role for himself in the organization, Pete subverted development efforts when he could because he felt threatened. His response led Mark to feel a need to assert his authority as board Chair. Lessons for groups. Power is not the same as leadership but is often a feature of it (Maccoby, 1976, 1981; McClelland, 1975; Zaleznik & Kets de Vries, 1975).

134    Terry Fernsler Power in organizations has three identifiable forms. The most familiar form is power over, which is explicit or implicit dominance. A leader’s dependence on this kind of power has costs in undermining both relationships with team members and goal achievement (Kipnis, 1976). A second form is power to, which gives individuals the opportunity to act more freely through power sharing, or what is commonly called empowerment. A third form is power from, which is the ability to resist the power of others by effectively fending off their unwanted demands. High status in a group carries the potential for all of these power forms. The source of power relied upon by a leader can change with circumstances. For example, Pete exercised power over staff and volunteers. He exercised power from the board of directors by remaining opaque – refusing to attend committee meetings and hiding potential conflicts of interest. Ludwig and Longnecker (1993) found that usually the most successful leaders suffer the worst ethical failures. In part, power leads to privileged access, providing more opportunities to indulge, and therefore requiring more willpower to resist. The dark side of institutionalized charisma can be seen in cases such as United Way of America (Eisenberg, 2011) and the National Rifle Association (Levine, 2019), in which the CEOs of each organization abused their positions of power for personal inurement. However, it took years, even decades before William Aramony of United Way and Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association abused their power, and it came after they had many major successes. In those cases, the organizations were larger and more intricate than the much smaller and relatively informal Habitat for Humanity affiliate in this case, which helps explain Pete’s abuse of power occurring more quickly. Pete had also learned to use his charisma in his previous position. While Pete was not the founder of the organization, he had been given much authority by the board. The board members who knew about the affair between Pete and Lori did not feel it was necessary to check his power because he had been so successful in growing the organization. In turn, Lori enabled Pete’s behavior, first allowing boundaries between her and her supervisor to blur, and then particularly when she agreed to step up to the executive director position to please the charismatic Pete, even though she did not have the requisite skills and knowledge for the complexities of fundraising and finances needed in the position. A conflict of interest clearly arises where a supervisor has direct input into the terms and conditions of employment of his romantic partner. The potential for positive evaluations (or negative if the relationship sours) and bias in pay rates – and as in this case, even succession – is quite high. The knowledgeable board members allowed Pete too much authority because of his charisma. They did not talk openly about the potential conflict of interest – to Pete or to the rest of the board of directors. Lessons for the organization. Board members of nonprofit organizations have a duty of care to the organization they serve. This means each member must act in good faith and actively participate in governing the organization (BoardSource, 2010). This includes enforcing bylaws and policies. The organization had a conflict of interest policy that included reporting any potential conflicts, however the

When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain    135 board members who knew about the relationship between Pete and Lori chose either to not abide by it or were unaware of the policy. Nonprofit Boards of directors also have a duty of obedience, which includes being guardians of the mission (BoardSource, 2010). Accountability is important in nonprofit organizations (Kearns, 1994), and Ebrahim (2010) explores what this means by asking: 1. Accountability to whom 2. Accountability for what 3. Accountability how. Boards of directors are accountable to those they serve: the organization’s stakeholders (Ebrahim, 2010). Nonprofit stakeholders include the board of directors itself, but also supporters and constituents in the community. Accountability for what includes sound financial management, governance, performance and progress toward the mission. Governance involves creating and monitoring bylaws and policies, both of which are created to carry out the mission (Ebrahim, 2010). Transparency and open communication are necessary for accountability in multi-stakeholder organizations. Stakeholders tend to be more sensitive to ethical decision-making in nonprofit organizations because the organizations are mission driven. Ethical decision-making becomes even more important in faith-based organization. Many stakeholders of the Habitat for Humanity affiliate were congregations that did not look favorably on adultery. The reputation of the organization – which is especially important for nonprofit organizations (Heller, 2008) – could have been ruined if the board had not successfully covered up the affair and relied on the moral brand of being affiliated to Habitat for Humanity International. As it was, the local affiliate lost a highly capable development director.

Conclusion In this case, the executive director catalyzed tremendous organizational growth, relying on his charisma. He quickly built power in the organization and let his ego influence organizational decisions. Some board members allowed unethical behavior because of obedience to someone who they thought was a transformational leader. It was not until board members whose reputations were closely associated with the organization learned of the behavior that steps were taken to exert shared authority. Even then, those board members supporting the Executive Director held enough influence that the situation could be only partially corrected. Board and staff of nonprofit organizations have obligations to act in good faith in the governance of the organization. Sharing this responsibility requires transparency, but this organization’s executive director (and some of the board members) operated opaquely. When the board of the organization ceded too much authority to the Executive Director, it lost a valuable resource (the Development

136    Terry Fernsler Director) and for a time had to operate under fear of being exposed to community stakeholders with high moral expectations. Nonprofit boards have the responsibility to enforce the duties of care and obligation. It is incumbent on veteran board members and the executive director to ensure new board members understand their obligations and to report any questionable behavior. When a founder, or a leader with founder authority, abuses power for personal gain, shared responsibilities require transparent decision-making.

References Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Transformational leadership and organizational culture. The International Journal of Public Administration, 17(3–4), 541–554. Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 181–127. Block, S. R. (2004). Why nonprofits fail. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Block, S. R., & Rosenberg, S. (2002). Toward an understanding of founder’s syndrome: An assessment of power and privilege among founders of nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 12(4), 353–368. BoardSource. (2007). The nonprofit board answer book: A practical guide for board members and chief executives (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass BoardSource. (2010). The handbook of nonprofit governance. San Francisco, CA: ­Jossey-Bass. Chait, R. P., Ryan, W. P., & Taylor, B. E. (2011). Governance as leadership: Reframing the work of nonprofit boards. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Ebrahim, A. (2010). The many faces of nonprofit accountability. In D. O. Renz (Ed.), The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Eisenberg, P. (2011, November 22). The death of a flamboyant charity wrongdoer sends a reminder to regulators. The Chronicle of Philanthropy. Retrieved from https://www. philanthropy.com/article/A-Charity-Scoundrel-s-Death/157497 Fast, N. J., Sivanathan, N., Mayer, N. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). Power and overconfident decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(2), 249–260. Fusco, G. M., & Freeman, A. (2007). The crisis-prone patient: The high-arousal cluster B personality disorders. In F. M. Dattilio & A. Freeman (Eds.). Cognitive-behavioral strategies in crisis intervention (3rd ed., pp. 122–148). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Greenwald, H. P. (2008). Organizations: Management without control. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Grobman, G. M. (2018). An introduction to the nonprofit sector: A practical approach for the twenty-first century. Harrisburg, PA: White Hat Communications. Heller, N. A. (2008). The influence of reputation and sector on perceptions of brand ­alliances of nonprofit organizations. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 20(1), 15–36. Hopkins, B. R., & Gross, V. C. (2010). The legal framework of the nonprofit sector in the United States. In D. O. Renz & Associates (Eds.), The Josssey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management (pp. 42–76). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

When Founder’s Syndrome Is Used for Personal Gain    137 Kearns, K. P. (1994). The strategic management of accountability in nonprofit organizations: An analytical framework. Public Administration Review, 54(2), 185–192. Kipnis, D. (1976). The powerholders. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Levine, M. (2019, August 2). Another voice says something is rotten at the NRA. Nonprofit Quarterly. Retrieved from https://nonprofitquarterly.org/another-voice-says-­ something-is-rotten-at-the-nra/ Ludwig, D. C., & Longenecker, C. O. (1993). The Bathsheba syndrome: The ethical failure of successful leaders. Journal of Business Ethics, 12(4), 265–273. Maccoby, M. (1976). The gamesman, the new corporate leaders. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Maccoby, M. (1981). The leader; A new face for American management. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Mathiasen, K. III. (1983). The board of directors is a problem: Exploring the concept of the following and leading board. Washington, DC: Management Assistance Group. McClelland, D. (1975). Power: The inner experience. New York, NY: Irvington. Muriithi, S., & Wachira, D. (2016). The Founders’ syndromes, challenges and solutions. Researchjournali’s Journal of Entrepreneurship, 4(4), 1–11. Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self-­ enhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 197–1208. Zaleznik, A., & Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (1975). Power and the corporate mind. Boston, MA: Houghton Mitflin.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 13

How to Destroy a Research & Development Group without Really Trying Jay L. Brand Abstract This chapter illustrates the consequences that can result from a mismatch between leadership style and organizational contexts required to encourage genuine investigation and exploration – particularly in topical areas relevant to the enterprise’s business model. This cautionary tale suggests not only that leadership approaches need to complement the necessary conceptual challenges involved in rigorously defining relevant problems and strategies in order to sustain organizational success; ideally, it should also align with the strengths and goals of the teams led. Thus, a senior marketing, communication and sales leader may not support the creative research and evidence-based, user-centered design necessary to nurture innovation within, for example, a future-oriented research and development team. Such cultural misalignments have been well framed by classical theories of leadership as well as by empirical comparisons of enduringly successful companies with more transient corporations. Keywords: Employee engagement; humane management; intrinsic motivation; learning organization; McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y; organizational psychology

Dedicated to describing and analyzing instances of leadership gone wrong in the hope of thereby illuminating and clarifying characteristics of good leadership in contrast, this volume constitutes an ideal forum for the following story. Although the details are accurate to the best of my memory and ability, they’re almost certainly incomplete, and the names have been changed to protect both the innocent and the guilty … When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 139–146 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211013

140    Jay L. Brand

Introduction The tale I will share serves to indict far-too-typical leadership practices in many organizations. Although I would not question the integrity or good intentions of many if not most corporate leaders, I believe that even accurate evidence for strategic decisions – if it merely reflects financial considerations – can distract leaders from the priority of optimizing the quality of human experience. As Amabile and Kramer (2011) reminded us, the moment by moment attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and even moods of employees have a salient influence on the quality of their interactions with colleagues as well as with customers – interactions that can result in winning or losing clients and can thus impact the ubiquitous “bottom line.” Many senior executives may scoff at the suggestion that they might be responsible for the “inner life” of their employees – especially due to the variety and frequency of what they may consider much more important decisions. Yet I would maintain that if “opportunity costs” are considered, then the quality of employees’ subjective experience holds the key to initiating, nurturing, and maintaining innovation – increasingly recognized as the only path to sustainable global competitiveness.

Background The following incident occurred during my time with an international corporation headquartered in Southwest Michigan. Some background and context may prove to be helpful. My immediate supervisor, the individual most involved in hiring me, managed to persuade the relatively small group of senior executives that the company needed some vanguard explorers who could anticipate the future needs, interests, and preferences of clients, thus providing evidence-based guidance to corporate strategy so that it could stretch “just over the horizon.” To use a metaphor that oversimplifies his recommendation, he enjoined that their current myopic focus on cost-benefits analysis, supply-chain management, material efficiencies, coordinating logistics and managing operations might eventually result in their becoming better and better at designing, manufacturing and marketing wagon wheels.

The Story Prior to my arrival, the group – consisting of several industrial designers, two writers/editors, a machinist, and one or two manufacturing engineers – set about to create a knowledge road map for their organization. They persuaded the company to give them space for exploration, rapid prototyping, active experimentation (in the try-it-out, action-research, self-as-user style), and informal dialog. To their credit, the company gave them quite a large, relatively unfinished space that encouraged writing proverbs and potentially relevant maxims from Architectural gurus, futurists, business strategists, and environmental activists all over the walls. Soon filled with cushy/comfy sofas from goodwill, this environment – almost by itself – convinced many visiting client groups of the company’s dedication to creatively “future-proofing” prospective partnership with their organization.

How to Destroy a Research & Development Group without Really Trying    141 One of the writers/editors began inviting notable scientists and strategists to visit with the group in their informal “warehouse” space for a few days. All of these luminaries provided very interesting, relevant information, but no one in the group had extensive experience in designing, conducting and interpreting the kind of rigorous, human-centered research required to adequately guide future product design and development. Approximately at this moment in time, due to my wife’s insistence that we leave Southern California and move back to her home in Michigan, I responded to this group’s placement of a job opening in the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society’s bulletin. That same day, I received an invitation to interview with the company and joined their R&D group soon after. In the ensuing months and years, the group continued to hire several competent scientists and researchers, occasionally adding a member internally (e.g., from Market Research). Our group manager eventually boasted 18 or 19 team members dedicated to experimenting about the future for this growing, global enterprise. We almost gleefully set out to understand a host of issues ranging from familiar Ergonomics concerns to the difference between the influence of organizational culture and national culture (e.g., for employees working for an American firm located in China). Due to clients’ inordinate interest in these matters, we focused extensively on the many factors that contribute to “knowledge worker productivity.” We designed and created several tools for collecting data online (e.g., surveys measuring group cohesiveness, employee engagement, quality of work life) and linked these outcomes, as best we could, with the products and services provided by the corporation (although I’m convinced that any relationship between the physical environment and employee outcomes is almost entirely mediated by psychosocial concerns; cf. Brand, 2008; Brand, 2017). At work, typically over bag lunches, we often watched fascinating documentaries depicting the rise of innovative firms that grew from largely garage-based start-ups to global behemoths (e.g., Xerox PARC, Microsoft, Apple). Although I wouldn’t claim that we ever reached such admirable levels of creativity, innovation and success, we did manage to “move the needle” on the company’s reputation as innovative among some of their most important constituencies. The company still retained many unenlightened management tools (e.g., annual performance reviews; scrutiny of every expense report and its accompanying receipts), but our group leader had an intuitive sense of more advanced practices, such as democratic design-making, participative management (Walton, 1986), the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration and exploration (DeGraff & Quinn, 2007), and the primacy of intrinsic over extrinsic motivation (Vallerand, 2000). Although rarely, members of our group did actually win contracts from large corporations merely because their decision-maker(s) happened to attend one of our professional seminars. In an effort to abbreviate a rather long story, our R&D group eventually expanded to include client consulting; we welcomed team members in São Paulo, London, Shanghai, Melbourne, New York City, Los Angeles, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Atlanta, Chicago, and San Francisco – many of whom were already architects, designers, or workplace consultants. Among many other accomplishments, we developed innovative measurement technologies to decipher social networks,

142    Jay L. Brand strategic programming (an Architectural technique to align the built environment with its human users’ needs, interests and preferences), and visually oriented applications for our company’s products, securing several patents and publishing in scientific journals along the way. During this time, our primary group leader remained, but two or three additional, more sales-oriented managers were added to coordinate client consulting globally; however, my hiring supervisor insisted on focusing primarily on product design and development, and he hired, internally, a manager to drive that emphasis. As a matrix organization, the company frequently involved all of us in more client-facing activities than determining successful future products would allow, so we often felt like Janus – with an internally directed R&D “face” and an externally facing consulting one.

Inflection Point This mostly invigorating narrative came to a screeching halt one day in the following way. Briefly, the Vice President (VP) in my “up-line” scheduled a voice conference with all the members of the group. I participated via mobile phone driving to the airport to fulfill a speaking engagement with a high-profile client and their Architectural partner. In fewer than 5 minutes, she shared that our manager (the one hired internally by my original supervisor, whom we all really liked and appreciated due to his very laissez-faire management style, perfect for engaging our highly competent, self-motivated group) was being replaced with someone whom we didn’t know. She then promptly ended the call and that was that. There were no preceding or subsequent conversations, no requests for input, no exploration, no interest in our perspectives, no prior notice, no rationale, no reasoning or attempt at strategic context for the decision – nothing! None of us ever had an opportunity to give anyone any feedback of any kind – either regarding our then-previous manager or his dubious replacement. Additionally, the new manager was inappropriate to lead our group for several obvious reasons. He turned out to be a very hierarchical micro-manager who knew much less than any of the members of our group about the level of research and consulting we were involved in, yet he managed to position himself as the “source” of our knowledge to his superiors within the company. In his defense, I would speculate that upon being hired, he had received a mandate from senior management to “reign in” or at least re-focus that weird, irrelevant R&D group, in an inappropriate attempt to directly link our activities to current sales and client services. Of course, such a drastic shift to sales support from R&D completely destroyed all of our intrinsic motivation. Endeavoring to find a “silver lining” on this cloudy replacement manager, I confess that he did once share with me a strategy that convinced the CEO to hire a few more client consultants by framing the need for these team members within the core values expressed in the company’s official statement of vision, mission and priorities. I thus admit that it’s possible to learn something from almost anyone – even an otherwise mostly unenlightened autocratic manager. Due to a number of subsequent missteps (e.g., our group’s internal HR consultant breaking confidence with one member of our group who complained

How to Destroy a Research & Development Group without Really Trying    143 to her about our new manager; her immediate response to the concerns was to talk to our new manager about the issues – which had been shared confidentially), essentially all but one of the members of our team left the company for other abundant opportunities. Admittedly, the “financial bean counters” at the company may have believed that getting rid of our professional payroll actually helped the company – at least reducing its fixed costs; but in terms of investment in R&D (e.g., innovation) and “future-proofing” the organization, I would conservatively estimate that they lost at least half of their futurist perspective and potential. Other than one individual whom I hired (an Architect with a PhD who has subsequently been laid off), all of those who could design, plan, and conduct credible research left. In an attempt to portray the company in the best possible light, they did hire a competent Global Director of Research a few years after our R&D team was decimated, but he primarily works with Marketing Research in advisory roles; no real user-centered research has been conducted internally for a very long time – perhaps a decade. I even continue to suspect that the relevant VP, as she had been hired from a nearby competitor, actually served as a successful “mole” – inserted stealthily by our rival firm; perhaps something even more sinister may have been afoot (cf. Babiak & Hare, 2006). I suppose I should have anticipated this misfortune years earlier. I once scheduled a meeting with this relevant VP at the invitation of my manager when he refused to grant me a raise I felt I deserved (in my 16 years with the company, my average annual raise was less than 2% of my salary – clearly less than inflation). Although I assumed I came to the meeting well-prepared, with examples of peer-reviewed journal articles, scholarly book chapters (featuring the company’s products in pictures to illustrate ergonomics design principles), and other accomplishments, she responded, “Jay, those [publications] are meaningless to me.” Subsequently, I realized that what she meant was that to squeeze any value out of those knowledge resources, I would need to develop “marketing-friendly” materials for the company that our dealers could use to associate the information conveyed with company products and services in a manner that potential customers could quickly and easily understand. However, in retrospect, her general disdain for scientific research should have clarified her priorities for me much earlier than the “epic failure of leadership” described above.

Interpretation and Implications Absolutely every relevant aspect of this decision careened exactly 180° opposite of an ideal approach as might be mandated by an enlightened leader (Brand, 2020; Dipboye, Smith, & Howell, 1994). McGregor’s (1960) classic distinction between “Theory X” and “Theory Y” of management would characterize this incident and the process of its implementation as reflecting most if not all of the disadvantages of “Theory X.” Although perhaps a bit dated in his writing style, McGregor (1960) brilliantly argued that these two approaches to leadership differed primarily in terms of their assumptions about employee motivation. “Theory X” leaders assumed that employees have no reason to contribute to organizational goals

144    Jay L. Brand unless influenced by various “carrots” (e.g., a promised bonus for meeting a sales quota) and “sticks” (e.g., threats of punitive measures for missing work, deadlines or goals). In this view, employees naturally tend to be lazy unless externally driven by instrumental means (e.g., rewards and punishment). In contrast, “Theory Y” leaders operate on the assumption that employees generally want to perform well, to learn, to grow, and to contribute to organizational success. Unless discouraged or dissuaded by toxic or dysfunctional circumstances, most employees remain intrinsically motivated, especially by meaningful accomplishments and recognition for achievement. “Theory X” treats employees as “cogs in the machine” who basically do what they’re told, while “Theory Y” accepts that employees are unique individuals motivated by creative, fulfilling responsibilities, and thus often consults them regarding how to improve their roles. Additionally, this episode ignored both Edward Deming’s (Gabor, 2000) belief that the information critical for improving quality is primarily distributed among workers, and Chester Barnard’s (Gabor & Mahoney, 2013) contention that morality and persuasion based on strong rationales should be core values for any executive. Furthermore, this unfortunate experience disregarded Drucker’s (2011) belief that in order to do something new you have to stop doing something old, Peter Senge’s (1990) call for “Learning Organizations,” and Govindarajan’s and Trimble’s (2010) description of protecting investment in innovation without damaging current operations (cf. Govindarajan, 2016). Finally, much if not most of the advice contained in the primary resource that might applaud our VP’s decision, “Re-engineering the Corporation” (Hammer & Champy, 2005), would require careful qualification and thoughtful clarification – not only for ethical and indeed moral reasons, but also based on the inevitable impact on prospective financial performance. Any student of organizational psychology could elaborate extensively on this leadership failure, but in an effort to provide a simple, practical yet powerful model to elucidate its occurrence, imagine an ellipse framing two prominent focal points in tension. Label one of these foci humane consideration and the other financial stewardship. The importance of leaders simultaneously prioritizing these two often competing goals has been recognized for almost four decades (cf. Ouchi, 1981; Peters & Waterman, 1982). Yet leaders often exhibit dogmatic adherence to presumed strategies at their command simply due to prerogative (cf. Kerr, 1995). In many cases, such decisiveness emphasizes the preservation of capital over the growth and development of people – sacrificing one of these crucial foci to the other. In this regard, most organizations do not understand much less measure opportunity costs, so any trimming of future creativity or innovation potential in the name of cost effectiveness goes largely unnoticed except for its immediate, positive impact on the “bottom line.” Additionally, an enduring, engaging corporate culture requires careful tending and continual, dynamic attention over many years (Quinn, 2011), but a few moments of autocratic neglect can destroy its advantageous inertia (Groysberg, Lee, Price, & Cheng, 2018). A meaningful, fulfilling organizational culture takes years of intentional effort and discipline to develop, and even small doses of apathy, of taking such affirming conditions for granted, can rapidly discourage the most gifted of teams.

How to Destroy a Research & Development Group without Really Trying    145

Conclusion In closing, I will summarize Gabor’s (2000) helpful outline of De Geus (1997) four characteristics that invariably seem to distinguish enduring from transient enterprises: 1. They display a genuine sensitivity to and concern for their environment. 2. As socially cohesive firms, they provide a strong sense of organizational “community” and identity – i.e., they nurture “a feeling of belonging to a social system.” Although lifetime employment is not guaranteed, new leaders are often promoted from within rather than outside, and employee tenure is embraced, rather than representing an aberration. However, in addition, these companies tend to be highly selective with regard to “new hires” – those individuals who will influence their future culture. Thus, longevity does not dissolve into complacency. Although occasionally the values and needs of an individual and company priorities may become irreconcilable, a strong “psychological contract” in these firms assures “that there is at least a statistical probability of lifetime employment.” 3. These companies also reflect a high tolerance for the internal challenges associated with change. They appear to be especially “tolerant of activities on the margin: outliers, experiments, and eccentricities within the boundaries of the cohesive firm.” 4. Finally, these long-lasting firms tend to be financially conservative, focusing on good monetary stewardship and the preservation of capital. Notice that the first three of these factors relate either directly or indirectly to the humane consideration foci of the ellipse model I framed earlier, and the fourth encompasses financial stewardship. No successfully enduring institution or organization can long ignore any of these competencies. Comparing these features with the inadequate leadership behavior described in this chapter may be enlightening. First, our VP discounted her environment, which valued creativity, innovation, and evidence-based design solutions – evidence not likely to arise from elsewhere in the company. Second, she not only flouted but embodied opposition to the second characteristic – she hired an unknown middle-manager from outside the firm, and the CEO hired her from a competitive organization. Thus, an affirming culture of trust based on “hiring internally” got doubly snubbed. Third, this VP’s frequent marginalizing (and, incidentally, the CEO’s as well) of the research, investigation, and critical exploration that defined our R&D group resulted in almost continual pressure from the ubiquitous need to drive current sales, a misplaced anxiety usually deadly to the deep learning necessary for refreshing strategy (Wergin, 2019). Wergin’s helpful term constructive disorientation which involves balancing natural curiosity with the disequilibrium necessary to displace complacency provides a fair description of our team’s contributions – not only inside our company but within the entire industry. Regrettably, a failure of leadership prematurely ended our delightful sandbox experience, silencing our advocacy of designing to optimize human experience.

146    Jay L. Brand

References Amabile, T., & Kramer, S. (2011). The progress principle: Using small wins to ignite joy, engagement, and creativity at work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Babiak, P., & Hare, R. D. (2006). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York, NY: ReganBooks. Brand, J. L. (2008). Office ergonomics: A review of pertinent research and recent developments. In C. Carswell (Ed.), Review of human factors and ergonomics (Vol. 4, pp. 245–282). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Brand, J. L. (2017). Health and productivity effects of hot desks, just-in-time work spaces, and other flexible workplace arrangements. In A. Hedge (Ed.), Ergonomic workplace design for health, wellness, and productivity (pp. 341–352). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Brand, J. L. (2020). Leadership and organizational dynamics. Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, in press. De Geus, A. (1997). The living company. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. DeGraff, J., & Quinn, S. E. (2007). Leading innovation: How to jump start your organization’s growth engine. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Dipboye, R. L., Smith, C. S., & Howell, W. C. (1994). Understanding industrial and organizational psychology: An integrated approach. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt. Drucker, P. (2011). The practice of management, rev. ed. London: Routledge. Gabor, A. (2000). The capitalist philosophers: The geniuses of modern business – their lives, times, and ideas. New York, NY: Times Business. Gabor, A., & Mahoney, J. T. (2013). Chester Barnard and the systems approach to nurturing organizations. In M. Witzel & M. Warner (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of management theorists (pp. 134–151). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Govindarajan, V. (2016). The three‐box solution: A strategy for leading innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2010). The other side of innovation: Solving the execution challenge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Groysberg, B., Lee, J., Price, J., & Cheng, J. Yo-Jud. (2018). The leader’s guide to corporate culture: How to manage the eight critical elements of organizational life. Harvard Business Review, reprint R1801B. Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (2005). Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Kerr, S. (1995). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. The Academy of Management Executive, 9(1), 7–14. McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Ouchi, W. (1981). Theory Z: How American management can meet the Japanese challenge. New York, NY: Basic Books. Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from America’s best‐run companies. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Quinn, R. E. (2011). Mastering competing values: An integrated approach to management (pp. 75–84). In J. S. Osland & M. E. Turner (Eds.), The organizational behavior reader (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Prentice Hall. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday. Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory: A view from the hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 312–318. Walton, M. (1986). The Deming management method. New York, NY: The Berkley Publishing Group. Wergin, J. F. (2019). Deep learning in a disorienting world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chapter 14

When Leading the Team Goes Wrong Dayne Hutchinson and Sholondo Campbell Abstract This chapter revisits and examines the experience of working with a new senior level administrator who failed to understand their role on the team. This was further compounded by the administrator’s inability to establish trust and rapport, assimilate into an established organizational culture, and empower staff. Additionally, this administrator’s style could best be described as managing instead of leading. This failure to assess and learn the group dynamics of the team resulted in a lack of buy-in and a visceral decrease in team morale. Change was swift and fast, but not transformational. Within 14 months of the hire of the new senior administrator, two office support staff assistants resigned and four of the six associate/assistant directors within the office resigned. Within two years, the senior administrator resigned. The authors will provide remedies that will assist future leaders in similar situations in making better decisions, as well as provide examples of ways to connect with staff and implement change together. Keywords: Change management; organizational culture; supervision; group dynamics; leadership; student affairs

Introduction Leading a team can sometimes be difficult, especially when one comes into an organizational culture, that is, established, productive and cohesive. Hackman, Wageman, and Fisher (2009) assert that team leadership within itself, is not a singular act, but a team activity (p. 202). Being an effective team leader, within the context of higher education, means taking the time to develop a personal ­relationship with one’s staff, listening, learning, finding common ground and including the team’s feedback in decision-making. This chapter revisits and examines the experience of working with a new senior level administrator who failed to understand their role on the team. When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 147–156 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211014

148    Dayne Hutchinson and Sholondo Campbell This was further compounded by the administrator’s inability to establish trust and rapport, assimilate into an established organizational culture and empower staff. Additionally, this administrator’s style could best be described as managing instead of leading. Leadership describes one’s ability to influence others, to motivate them and to move the needle on both their thoughts and actions (Kuk & Banning, 2016, p. 2). Effective leadership is often depicted through the institution or organization’s ability to achieve success. In achieving this success, leaders must consider the roles of their followers, or team as integral to achieving shared goals (Kuk & Banning, 2016). Over the years, research has shown that strong teams add value to an organization, and that when leaders recognize that their subordinates can help in leading a team, productivity and staff moral increases (Katzenbach & Smith, 2015; Lee, Gillespie, Mann, & Wearing, 2010). Shared leadership speaks to everyone’s involvement in achieving the team’s mission, and involves the ongoing emergence of multiple team members, with skills that specifically align with the tasks at hand (Pearce & Conger, 2002). Decisions that are made on behalf of the team from the top down, without getting feedback from the bottom up, often times lead to trouble (Shipp & Kim, 2014, p. 5). This was exactly the case when a Senior Student Affairs Officer (SSAO) was hired to lead a team of six student affairs officers at varying stages of their careers. The team did not work together in the same physical office space, but had regular, virtual team meetings via Skype. This particular team was very close knit. One’s ability to do their job depended on the sharing of information and working closely together. The synergy of the team was disrupted when a leader was hired who did not value the team’s relationship, and as a result, team members felt as though they were on the outside looking in. While the team was involved in the hiring process of the new leader, the final decision was left to the Vice President for Student Affairs. There were significant gaps in the onboarding process of this new leader, with subordinates often times having to teach this leader how to do the job effectively. The team quickly began to realize that the leadership style of this new leader was not one that valued collaboration but one that was rooted in the positionality of power to drive change. When a SSAO inherits a team they did not hire or pick, they must make a conscious effort to build trust, learn the team culture and to listen. Winston and Creamer (1998) assert that in order for staff development and supervision to work, the establishment of trust and an open relationship between staff members and a supervisor must exist. They further state that employees must believe that their supervisor has their best interests in mind and prioritizes their success (p. 37). In the SSAO’s attempt to establish and maintain their power, they simultaneously diminished the team’s voice and, in some cases, its performance (Tost, Gino, & Larrick, 2013). The process of building trust is one that takes time. One must recognize that high performing teams are high performing because there is a culture of teamwork and shared understanding of the mission at play. A new leader must take the time to get to know each member of the team singularly and personally, to best assess what the staff member’s role on the team is. Teams with new leadership oftentimes understand that change is inevitable. Ones positionality to power

When Leading the Team Goes Wrong    149 cannot be the driving force behind decision-making, or gaining the buy-in of staff. Using power as blunt force leads to tension, conflict and eventual group resentment (Shipp & Kim, 2014, p. 5). This chapter will outline how a high functioning team of six changed over the course of two years. Within 14 months of the hire of the new senior administrator, two office support staff assistants resigned and four of the six associate/assistant directors within the office resigned. Within two years, the senior administrator resigned. This chapter will provide tangible examples of these failures across the intersection of individual, group and divisional leadership. The authors will provide remedies that will assist future leaders in similar situations in making better decisions, as well as provide examples of ways to connect with staff and implement change together.

Background Breakdown of the team. The department consisted of a team of six student affairs practitioners who were located at campuses throughout the State. The department was charged with developing and delivering student affairs programing to distance students based on their geographic regions and online. Historically, the Director of the department would be at a seventh location, which was the flagship campus for the institution. The team met on a bi-weekly basis via video chat – and later, desktop webcam software – with the Director meeting one-on-one with team members on alternating weeks. Additionally, the team gathered twice a year for a departmental retreat, as well as participating in the Division’s annual training and development session. Though there was great geographic distance between them, the team was often described as cohesive and having strong communication and relationships. The team could also be described as diverse in a number of ways, including race/ ethnicity, age and professional experience. Experience levels ranged from individuals who had joined the team immediately following the completion of their graduate studies, to those who had served in the field for over 15 years. Though in the past, individuals in the department had moved on to other roles, there was never a sense of these exits happening due to frustration or team members needing to “escape.” It was widely understood that all of these exits were due to either relocation or an obvious opportunity for advancement. Former team members often remained closely connected, and would re-convene for holiday parties and conference calls long after their employment had ended with the institution.

Timeline The Director of the department moved on, and for a substantial time, the team operated without someone formally in the position. During this time, the responsibilities of the Director were divided between the two most senior team members, who were later reclassified to Associate Directors. Operationally, the department continued to function at a high level, and was often praised – publicly and privately – for the work they were doing to enhance student life in their respective areas.

150    Dayne Hutchinson and Sholondo Campbell Individuals from other departments often joked that there was no need to fill the Director vacancy, and this belief seemed also to be held by the senior leaders of the Division as the initial search committee for a replacement was disbanded at an advanced stage in the process. After almost two years, a new SSAO was brought into the Division of ­Student Affairs at the institution. This SSAO had oversight of a number of areas including this team. Since there was no Director of the department, the Associate Directors reported directly to this SSAO in weekly virtual one-on-one meetings. Additionally, the SSAO was in attendance at the bi-weekly team meetings via webcam. Nevertheless, this was viewed initially as an opportunity for them to get to know the team and develop greater understanding regarding the nature of their work. Prior to the start of the SSAO’s tenure, the Associate Directors were called in a meeting with the Vice President for Student Affairs, who again commended them for the work that the team had been doing, while stating they felt that the current structure and processes were working very effectively and believed they should be kept that way. However, this was not reflected in the reality of the department under the new SSAO. After about five weeks in the position, the SSAO stripped away the responsibilities that had been assigned to the Associate Directors. This was without any explanation being provided beyond the repeated statement “I just work better that way.” This also negated the recently updated position descriptions the Associate Directors had received with their reclassifications. The Associate Directors were relegated to providing administrative support for those responsibilities. This often resulted in projects being handed to them at the last minute whenever the SSAO was overwhelmed by their primary responsibilities, which included managing the student conduct process for the university. The Associate Directors requested an opportunity to clarify the new expectations, especially given the fact that their position descriptions more closely aligned with the expectations they had previously discussed with the Vice President for Student Affairs. After receiving no response from the SSAO, they requested a meeting with the Vice President which would include the SSAO as they felt that this would have been the best way to clearly articulate how the team would be moving forward. Their meeting request was initially ignored by the Vice President. After repeated requests for clarification – especially given the fact that the position descriptions and the reality of the situation were becoming further misaligned – the Vice President finally responded via the SSAO that there would be no meeting and that the Associate Directors needed to simply “do your jobs because you’re being insubordinate.” Other patterns emerged which contributed to members of the team experiencing a negative shift in the environment. This included the SSAO’s insistence on being copied on all correspondence to other departments within the Division and the University. Additionally, the team – which had historically been commended for having strong communication – felt that they were losing their ability to partner remotely and collaborate on various multicampus projects. This was primarily due to the fact that SSAO needed to be invited to participate in, and direct, all video chats. Team members were routinely and intensely questioned about why they were having virtual meetings with each other, when these often

When Leading the Team Goes Wrong    151 were related to mundane topics such as walking through the submission process for merchandise invoices for student organizations. Staff were often approached by team members from other departments who refused to communicate with the SSAO due to the fact that they found them to be argumentative and condescending in their initial interactions. This often put the team members in the difficult position of having to find a diplomatic way to convey the fact that they were no longer allowed to make any decisions without the SSAO’s permission. With any change in a department comes a natural transition period as team members adjust to the new dynamics. This includes new leadership and communication styles, shifting responsibilities and the introduction of different personalities. Amado and Ambrose (2018) describe this transition as a psychosocial process, which requires proactive management by leaders. However, for this team the challenge was exacerbated by the fact that there was no communication from the SSAO regarding the new expectations, until team members were individually or collectively reprimanded for not meeting those expectations. A few years later – most of the team members have all moved into leadership positions within higher education, and outside of it. As we reflect upon this specific situation, we ask ourselves the following questions:

What Lessons Did We Learn as Individuals? We learned how to be better supervisors. As professionals now with the responsibility of supervising other professional staff members, we learned the value of people, and how to be better supervisors through our own lived experiences with management. We learned the importance of relationships, and how valuable that is in the field of student affairs. In this same light, we learned that in order to supervise people, one has to genuinely care about them. One must recognize and value the person behind the work, and as supervisors, listen to language both spoken and unspoken in the workplace. Arminio and Creamer (2001) outlines the qualities of a high quality supervisor: (a) a relationship between supervisor and staff is required, this relationship should be genuine, honest and rooted in employee growth and competence; (b) supervisors must walk a fine line between being present in the lives of their reports, but not be overwhelming – allowing their staff space and autonomy over their work and personal lives as it relates to the job; and (c) the work environment must be supportive, and all-encompassing of the values of quality supervision across all levels of leadership (pp. 42–43). The timeline above provides many examples of how quality supervision as posited by Arminio and Creamer (2001) were not realized in our experiences, which contributed to decisions of team members leaving for other opportunities or the field all together. We learned to manage up. We learned that in order to accomplish one’s goals, there is a certain level of managing up that comes into play. Everyone isn’t meant to focus on the small details. Realizing this sooner than later, can have a significant impact on your happiness at work and interpersonally. This does not mean you should not ask for help, when needed – but one should consider how you frame that ask when you do. Managing up also means that you recognize

152    Dayne Hutchinson and Sholondo Campbell and identify potential issues before they arise and take precautionary steps to circumvent them before getting your supervisor involved. Additionally, managing up means you have spent the time learning about your supervisor, to better anticipate their reactions and questions to best provide solutions in advance. Von Bergen, Soper, and Licata (2002) posit that through managing up, we build the kinds of relationships with our supervisors that can lead to mutual success (p. 70). The process of managing up requires additional labor outside of the routine realities of just doing our jobs, but is critical to moving projects along smoothly, avoiding conflict, and miscommunication. Von Bergen et al. (2002) further asserts that, “effective workers recognize this function as a legitimate part of their jobs; they must establish and manage relationships with everyone on whom they depend and interact-including administrators” (p. 70). We learned the value of a strong support system. Being a student affairs professional is emotionally taxing, as a lot of what we do deals with managing students who are at different stages of their personal development. Having a support network of professionals in the field, supportive co-workers, and strong relationships with family and friends helps with alleviating anxiety and dealing with workinduced stress. Leaning on these support networks can help in your own process of figuring out your place in the organization, understanding organizational politics and prioritizing your self-care.

What Lessons Can Others Learn From Our Experiences? Recognize when a system is broken, and call attention to it. As members of a team, you absolutely have the right to call attention to the ways decisions are being made, and how those decisions affect you. If your supervisor’s actions erode your confidence in your ability to do your job, and if they lecture you in public, this is a clear indicator that some change is needed in your working relationship. In their study on attrition from student affairs, Marshall, Gardner, Hughes, and ­Lowery (2016) found that the role of the supervisor and institution fit were significant contributors to staff’s decision to leave. Participants in the study described, among other things, poor supervision, incongruence with organizational culture and conflicts with supervisors as factors that influenced their decision to leave the field of Student Affairs all together (p. 155). If you are currently experiencing some of these as described, the question then becomes, how does one approach having this conversation with their supervisor without being fearful that it will be used against them in the future? This is never an easy question to answer; nevertheless, the question is inevitable. The first step is to formalize your thoughts and remove your personal feelings. When you approach your supervisor, focus on the facts and the details. Outline the effects of their actions, and their impact on your ability to do good work. The second step is to document your experiences. When did it happen? What was the context? Who was around when it happened? How did it make you feel? Documenting your experiences not only protects you, but can also be helpful in organizing your thoughts and informing additional follow up conversations if needed. Lastly, you should be prepared to escalate the situation to human resources, when you feel it is safe to do so.

When Leading the Team Goes Wrong    153 Recognize that your mental health is paramount. The emotional toll of working in an environment that requires significant amounts of mental energy, both to do your job and to support the students you work with and advise can be taxing. This emotional stress, if left unattended this can lead to significant staff burnout. Burnout, as defined by Maslach and Jackson (1981) is “a syndrome of emotional exhaustion and cynicism that occurs frequently among individuals who do ‘people work’ of some kind” (p. 99). When an organization becomes unhealthy, and frankly toxic, you must do your level best to ensure your peace and protect your mental health. Employ healthy strategies to manage stress and decompress from work. If your organization offers an Employee Assistance Program utilize this service to find a therapist if you do not already have one. These services are usually free and confidential. Therapy can help with setting goals, setting boundaries at work, identifying triggers and formulating a plan for you to continue showing up at work as your authentic self. Recognize when it is time to leave, and do it. A supervisor’s intentionality with staff professional development and growth are critical areas to realizing positive outcomes in supervisory relationships (Saunders, Cooper, Winston, & Chernow, 2000). When these necessary components are missing, it can create uncomfortable spaces. Oftentimes as professionals, when there is a negative organizational change at work, specifically within student affairs, our first instinct is to sacrifice ourselves and our happiness for others. We sometimes believe it is best to tuck our heads, and keep moving along. Organizational change is not always a bad thing, sometimes change is needed to prove to ourselves that we have also changed, and for us to fully grow into the professionals we want to become, means moving out, and starting anew. Recognize the value you bring to an organization, and allow yourself to be present in the process of finding an organization that recognizes the value in you, too.

What Can the Organization Learn From Our Experiences? Clarity early brings confidence later. Steps should always be taken to ensure that everyone who will be impacted by a transition has the same understanding of how the process will unfold. People tend to be more supportive of an initiative if they played a role in creating it. Research related to communication climate supports this idea. In a study by Neill, Men, and Yue (2019) the researchers concluded that in an environment where communication features an element of openness and participation, employees tended to have stronger identification with the organization, and were more positive in their reaction to changes. While it is not always feasible to have all parties convene to discuss the expectations, there was clearly a disconnect between what was communicated to the Associate Directors by the Vice President and what ultimately happened when the new SSAO came onboard. The Vice President’s reluctance to engage in discussion allowed what could have been a simple misunderstanding to escalate into a harmful conflict that eroded the confidence and effectiveness of a previously high performing team. When the Vice President did finally respond, it came from the SSAO; which cast doubt on what message was actually sent. A simple email copying everyone involved

154    Dayne Hutchinson and Sholondo Campbell would have sufficiently bridged this gap. The expectations may have shifted. However, the relatively short interval between the communication of these conflicting strategies, combined with the SSAO’s dismissive responses regarding these shifts, ­warranted clearer communication. Pay attention to the feedback you receive during the hiring process. This starts with ensuring that the search and screen committee represents all or most of the functional areas that are supervised and/or have significant interaction with a key position the organization is looking to fill. There were no members from any of the departments supervised by the SSAO position involved in the search committee. Additionally, interaction between team members and candidates during the search process was limited to about 35 minutes in a roundtable. Even then, first impressions indicated to everyone who had an opportunity to participate in the process that there were other candidates in the field who were better suited – both in temperament and qualifications – to manage all of the areas and personalities that would fall under the SSAO’s purview. Themes or concerns that emerge consistently during the search process are generally good predictors of candidate behavior and performance in the long term. As Reigle (2014) points out, current employees provide the best examples of the traits we are looking for, or trying to avoid, in new employees (p. 183). Interview questions and scoring templates can be developed simply by utilizing what we know about best and worst team members within any organization. The extent to which a hiring manager incorporates the feedback of current staff – particularly, those who will work most closely with the position being filled – will make the difference between a successful hire, and one that sets the organization back significantly. Don’t ignore the warning signs. A major or sudden decline in performance. Significant employee turnover. Historically non-disruptive employees suddenly “acting out” and facing multiple disciplinary sanctions. Each of these on their own provides an indication of some degree of poor health in an organization. However, the presence of all three of these simultaneously should signal that something has gone seriously awry. Organizational climate can be defined as the meaning people attach to collective and interrelated experiences they have at work (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). Organizations facing instances of these negative or downward trending issues must do a careful examination of the existing culture. This often requires asking hard questions and having uncomfortable conversations. It also means being prepared to address and rectify any of the underlying causes once the process of inquiry uncovers them.

Conclusion As we advance in our careers and learn to navigate the ins and outs of higher education, it should be an expectation that one will be led by many different people, with many different leadership styles. One’s early experiences in the field, will shape the foundation for their own career, and in turn, formulate the basis for how one will supervise professional staff, when the opportunity to ascend into a leadership role arises. Unfortunately, the experience we detailed above is one many of our colleagues know all too well. These experiences are often isolating,

When Leading the Team Goes Wrong    155 demoralizing, and can sometimes feel like an attack on our work and our existence within the workplace. The symptoms of this can show itself in a variety of ways, and can eventually lead to staff resentment, anger and a lack of motivation. In this case, team members started exploring exit strategies much earlier than they had initially planned, leading to a mass exodus within the department over a short-time period. The attrition also included the SSAO, who left the institution within two years of starting the position. The execution of change on any scale requires that leaders secure buy-in from those who will be required to implement the changes. It is far easier to accomplish a goal, if all members of the team are working toward shared priorities. Additionally, leaders should always strive to, whenever feasible, create opportunities for members of the team to provide input into the direction of the project. As the old adage goes – people will be more invested in the success of an initiative if they have had a role in its creation. Taking the time to ensure that all team members understand the vision early on, as well as the ways in which their work will ­support it, ultimately positions the team for sustained success in the future.

References Amado, G., & Ambrose, A. (Eds.). (2018). The transitional approach to change. London: Routledge. Arminio, J., & Creamer, D. G. (2001). What supervisors says about quality supervision. College Student Affairs Journal, 21(1), 35–44. Hackman, J. R., Wageman, R., & Fisher, C. M. (2009). Leading teams when the time is right: Finding the best moments to act. Organizational Dynamics, 38(3), 192–303. Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2015). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high‐ performance organization,. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Kuk, L., & Banning, J. H. (2016). Student affairs leadership: Defining the role through an ecological framework. Sterling, VA: Stylus. Lee, P., Gillespie, N., Mann, L., & Wearing, A. (2010). Leadership and trust: Their effect on knowledge sharing and team performance. Management Learning, 41(4), 473–491. Marshall, S. M., Gardner, M. M., Hughes, C., & Lowery, U. (2016). Attrition from student affairs: Perspectives from those who exited the profession. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 53(2), 146–159. Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 2(2), 99–113. Neill, M. S., Men, L. R., & Yue, C. A. (2019). How communication climate and organizational identification impact change. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 25(2), 281–298. Pearce, C. L., & Conger, J. A. (2002). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Reigle, D. A. (2014). Hiring the right employees. The Journal of Medical Practice Management: MPM, 30(3), 183–186. Saunders, S. A., Cooper, D. L., Winston, R. B., & Chernow, E. (2000, March/April). Supervising staff in student affairs: Exploration of the synergistic approach. Journal of College Student Development, 41(2), 181–191. Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., & Macey, W. H. (2013). Organizational climate and culture. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 361–388.

156    Dayne Hutchinson and Sholondo Campbell Shipp, J. E., & Kim, J. (2014). The gateway to cultural competence: The implications of leadership and gender on the student affairs organization. Focus on Colleges, Universities & Schools, 8(1). Tost, L. P., Gino, F., & Larrick, R. P. (2013). When power makes others speechless: The negative impact of leader power on team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1465–1486. Von Bergen, C. W., Soper, B., & Licata, J. W. (2002). Managing your administrator. Educational Forum, 67(1), 70–80. Winston, R. B., Jr, & Creamer, D. G. (1998). Staff supervision and professional development: An integrated approach. New Directions for Student Services, 1998(84), 29–42.

Chapter 15

No Rest in the Restroom: Servant Leadership and Conflict in Products & Marketing Timothy Hough Abstract Two of the many requirements for being a Servant Leader are compassion and understanding. In this chapter, the author examines the individual, group, and organizational lessons learned after a verbal confrontation between two executives in the lady’s restroom. The author examines what can happen when Servant Leadership fails and how, when people move up the stages of conflict, they get further away from the foundational elements of being a Servant Leader. Keywords: Conflict; leading by example; servant leadership; marketing; servant leadership failures; conflict escalation process

Introduction The year for the company had started very strong. Sales and profits were up. Our products were gaining traction in the market, and we were winning deals against our biggest competitor. All that changed on the day that we received a phone call from our largest customer telling us they were pleased with our services but had decided to go another direction to save on their expenses.

The Story The blow hit the organization like a bolt of lightning. No one in the company saw it coming. For the next few weeks, the executive team met daily to discuss where we could reduce variable costs within the company. Each leader proposed cuts within their departments, and each of the other executives agreed with the When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 157–165 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211015

158    Timothy Hough reductions and asked if the cuts could go any deeper. Toward the end of the conversations, one executive was asked what she intended to cut, and her response was, “I cannot cut anything, and actually, I would like to add staff to my team.” This statement floored all of the other executives. How could the Products and Marketing department not have any cuts? We were eliminating most of our development capabilities, and even if the products team had new products they wanted to bring to market, there were no resources actually to do the work. Each of the executives tried to make their case that cuts needed to occur throughout the entire organization. Still, the Products and Marketing executive would not budge and would not put forward any cuts. The talk in the hallways between the executives centered on how we were going to convince the Head of Products and Marketing to cut where she needed to cut. We also commiserated on how we were frustrated with the conversations leading up to this point. Our President called a lunch meeting with all of the executives except for the Head of Products and Marketing. During the lunch, the President proposed cuts to the Products and Marketing budget and asked if any of the other executives had any suggestions on where cuts should occur. At the end of the lunch, we had put together a budget that cut out almost every variable expense within the company. The morning after the lunch meeting, the President laid out all of the cuts, including the new cuts to the Products and Marketing group. The Head of Products and Marketing said she could not agree with the cuts to her department. This resulted in the President of the company stating the cuts were going to happen, and the Products and Marketing team would need to adapt their plans based on the new budget. After the executive team finalized the budget cuts, the group sat with the Managing Partner and CEO to outline the cost savings and get his feedback. The CEO was pleased with the proposal, but stated: “unfortunately, these cuts do not go deep enough for us to hit the profitability target we need to hit for this year.” Upon hearing this, the executive team realized the only way to stay profitable was to reduce our permanent workforce. The weight of this decision hung heavy in the room. In our 100-year history, we had never had a reduction in force, and we did not want to be the executive team that was responsible for people losing their jobs. We were all asked to take the night and to come back in the morning with our recommended staff cuts. After the meeting adjourned, a small group of the executive team met to discuss how we would handle the meeting the next day. We kept asking if we thought the Head of Products and Marketing would propose cuts. We had worked ourselves up into expecting the Head of Products and Marketing not to make any staffing cuts, and we all began to plan for the expected battle that would ensue around this topic. The next morning, the executives sat around the board room table, and each person gave their recommended cuts. When it came time for the Head of Products and Marketing to make a recommendation, she put a series of names forward. After many conversations, we agreed with how many people and who from each department would be removed from the company. In total, 8% of the workforce was selected for reduction, and our Vice President of Human Resources started outlining the plan on how we would cut.

No Rest in the Restroom    159 For the two weeks before the date the reduction was to occur, the executive team had met daily to discuss the transition and backup plans and to get an update from HR on the process and the cost of performing the reduction. Each day every executive would be asked what they had done the previous day to make the reduction go as smoothly as possible, and each day, every executive gave their update. Two days before the reduction event was supposed to occur, the entire executive team went through the plan step by step. There were a few items that needed to be covered before the meetings with the staff occurred, but everyone seemed to feel like we were on track. Everyone worked hard to get all of the open items closed. We did not want to fail in how we handled this reduction in force. The day before the meetings with employees was supposed to occur, the executive team met one final time to make sure we had everything covered. During this meeting, the Head of Products and Marketing stated, “I did not know the meetings were happening tomorrow. I am not ready. We are going to have to postpone doing this.” The moment this was said, the rest of the executive team became incensed and started asking questions like, “how could you not know the meetings were going to happen tomorrow? We have been talking about this for weeks,” and “just two days ago, you said you were ready, and there were no issues with making this happen.” The response to these questions was a curt “well, I did not know we were doing this tomorrow, and I am not ready. We will need to postpone another two weeks so I can get ready.” The entire room became silent, with each member of the executive team determining what to say next. The President told us we should take a 15-minute break and reconvene when the break was over. The Head of Products and Marketing stood up and left the room. The President stayed and talked to the remaining team for a few minutes and then quickly gathered up his equipment and went as well. Three minutes after he left the board room, one of the employees rushed in to get our Vice President of Human Resources, saying, “we need you now; we have a problem!” The Vice President of Human Resources left with the employee. As the 15-minute break was coming to an end, I noticed the Vice President of Human Resources standing at the end of the hallway near the restrooms. She was waving her hands at me to get my attention. As I walked toward her, I could hear yelling by both the Head of Products and Marketing and the President coming from the women’s restroom. I asked the Vice President of Human Resources what was happening, and she said, “the President (who is male) followed the Head of Products and Marketing into the women’s restroom, and it sounds like they are having a serious knockdown drag-out fight.” Stunned, I asked the Vice President of Human Resources what we should do, and her response was, I have no idea, I have never experienced anything like this in my career before. Right now, I am telling people the restrooms are out of service and trying to move as many people away from the area as I can so they do not hear what is happening. I asked the Vice President of Human Resources to hang on and went and grabbed the Executive Vice President of Operations to get his input. I brought him over

160    Timothy Hough to the Vice President of Human Resources in the hallway, and we explained what was happening. Stunned, the Executive Vice President of Operations asked us to explain to him a second time what was happening. After doing this, we all discussed what we should do. “Should we go in there and stop them, I asked?” We determined that it was not the best idea and settled on having me and the Executive Vice President of Operations call the owner of the company and explain what was happening. “Can you believe this is happening” The Executive Vice President of Operations and I asked one another as we rushed back to the board room to call the Owner. After several tries to get through, we finally reached the owner. “We have an issue at the office that we need you to be aware of,” we said. “Ok, what is going on,” The owner replied. About twenty minutes ago, The President followed The Head of Products and Marketing into the women’s room in the front office, and they are having a huge fight. Both are screaming and yelling, and the argument can be heard through the entire front office. There was a very long pause followed by, “can you say that again? The President and the Head of Products and Marketing are arguing in the main office, and everyone can hear, is that what you said?” “Actually, they are having a serious verbal altercation, but The President followed The Head of Products and Marketing into the women’s room, and that is where this is happening. The Vice President of Human Resources is standing out in front of the restrooms, telling people the restrooms are out of order”. We ended by saying, “We think you need to get down here as fast as possible.” The owner replied, “I am not coming down; call me when this is over.” “Ok,” we answered and hung up the phone. Sitting in silence for a minute, The Executive Vice President of Operations and I assessed the situation, and then we asked one another, “what do we do?” The Executive Vice President of Operations and I were getting up to leave the board room, The Vice President of Human Resources walked in and said the verbal altercation was over. The Head of Products and Marketing went back to her desk and then left for the day, and the President just went back to his office. He left shortly after as well. We called the owner and told him the incident had ended, but we had no idea what had happened as both The President and the Head of Products and Marketing had left for the day. The next morning everyone came back to the office, and no one mentioned what had happened the day before. We executed on the reduction in force as we had planned and, over the next year, returned the company to profitability.

Failures in Leadership The scenario that was explained above really happened and the executive team never spoke of the altercation as a group. For years after what we called “the incident,” we would talk about what happened individually or in small groups.

No Rest in the Restroom    161 We would tell the story to others, often receiving the same reaction. “He did what, where?” as a common response. In reflecting on the situation looking through a leadership lens, there are several areas where leadership failures occurred.

Individual Lessons Not Being A Servant Leader in Trying to Understand What The Head of Products and Marketing Needed When the Head of Products and Marketing mentioned she would not be ready and needed another two weeks to prepare, each member of the executive team immediately dismissed her concern and quickly labeled The Head of Products and Marketing as being difficult and pushing her own agenda. As a servant leader, I personally should have stopped to assist the entire team in better understanding and serving (Fehr & Gelfand, 2012) the needs of the Head of Products and Marketing. I should have tried to initiate an open conversation that included seeking consensus (Fehr & Gelfand, 2012) on what the Head of Products and Marketing needed – discussed why she was unprepared and attempted to understand better what had changed from the previous meetings. Each member of the team lost sight of the fact that being a good servant leader means being a servant to everyone, not just the people that report to us. Each of us also added to the tension by exhibiting our frustration for the situation and made matters worse by not at least trying to understand the Head of Products and Marketing’s position.

The Confrontation Many of the worst failures happened when the confrontation occurred. The apparent servant leadership failures in this situation start in the board room and end with the male President following the female Vice President into the women’s room. In their study on servant leadership and team conflict management, Wong, Liu, Wang, and Tjosvold (2016), determine “that servant leadership develops cooperative conflict management among followers” and “to the extent team members approach their conflicts co-operatively they improve team coordination.” As is indicated by the confrontation, at no time did the President or the Head of Products and Marketing take a co-operative approach to resolve their conflict. As no one was in the women’s room with them, there is no way to know exactly what happened and I will not speculate here, but for anyone who was outside of the women’s room, we all knew what was happening between the Head of Products and Marketing and The President. The Head of Products and Marketing and the President felt disrespected, ignored, and marginalized in one another’s eyes. The President felt the Head of Products and Marketing was insubordinate, and the Head of Products and Marketing thought the President was ignorant and a weak leader. As their argument went on, the comments became more personal and damaging.

162    Timothy Hough Conflict Escalation Glasl (1982) outlines the nine stages of conflict escalation. The first stage, Hardening, began in the board room when the entire team became frustrated with the situation and the conversation that was taking place. Each executive took sides and dug into their position. The group evolved into the second stage, Debates and Polemics (Glasl, 1982), when the group began to question how the Head of Marketing and Products could not know about what was happening the following day. This questioning led to bickering about how the team ended up where they were versus dealing with the situation (Jordan, 2000). This is the critical point in the incident where the group decided to take a break to see if it could regroup. This break is also the critical point where the escalation went from stage two to stage three. Stage three of Glasl’s (1982) nine stages of conflict is Actions. By following the Head of Marketing and Products into the restroom, the President took action in the confrontation. It is also important to note that this action was in the form of a physical (following a person into the restroom) and verbal (argument) confrontation. I believe this caused the conflict to escalate more rapidly than if the encounter had occurred in the board room with other team members present. The actions of the President caused the Head of Marketing and Products to take action by going into stage four of the nine stages of conflict. Stage four is Images and Coalitions (Glasl, 1982). In this stage, the conflict escalates into each person needing to save their reputation (Jordan, 2000). In this stage, it is also common to start to make comparisons of people to generalizations or stereotypes (Jordan, 2000). In the case of this conflict, we could hear the Head of Products and Marketing, saying the President was a weak leader and not like other Presidents she had worked for in the past. The President returned the volley by stating the Head of Products and Marketing was insubordinate and disrespectful, and she did not know how businesses worked. Jordan (2000) describes stage five, Loss of Face, as a transformation where the image one party holds of the other becomes radical. It is not an expansion of an old image but is felt as a sudden insight into the true, and very different nature of the other. The whole conflict history is now reinvented: one feels the other side has followed a consequent and immoral strategy from the very beginning. All their “constructive” moves were only deceptive covers for their real intentions. There is no longer ambiguity, but everything appears clear. The transformation Jordan (2000) describes in stage five occurred, which quickly lead to stages six and seven. Stage six, Strategies of Threats (Glasl, 1982), occurs when each party starts to strategies on how to minimize the threats presented by one another. After the strategies are analyzed, stage seven, Limited Destructive Blows (Glasl, 1982), occurs. As the confrontation in the restroom escalated, both people threw out the norms (Jordan, 2000) and became more personal with their attacks.

No Rest in the Restroom    163 As the attacks became more personal, stage eight, Fragmentation of The Enemy (Glasl, 1982) began. Both the President and the Head of Products and Marketing tried to damage the base of power of the other individual (Jordan, 2000). Interestingly enough, both people had the same base of power, which were the partners in the company. By attempting to destroy the other’s base of power, the person doing the destruction was destroying their base of power at the same time. As the bases of power were attacked, “all bridges were burned (Jordan, 2000)” and stage nine, Together Into The Abyss (Glasl, 1982), was achieved. In this stage, it is an all-out war, and there is no quarter given to any party whether they are involved directly or not. Collateral damage occurs throughout the organization, and no one is considered innocent or neutral in the conflict (Jordan, 2000).

Group Lessons Conflict Styles of the Executive Team Rahim (1983) outlines the five styles of conflict management. These styles are integrating, avoiding, dominating, obliging, and compromising. When reflecting on the personalities within the executive team sitting around the table at the time of the conflict, each style was represented. The President and Head of Products and Marketing both having a dominating conflict style. Typically, these styles would work in harmony when there was conflict within the team, but something happened that day that was different. In their study on accountability and cooperation, Sonntag and Zizzo (2019) found individual contributions declined when information regarding actions was made available (whether voluntarily or involuntarily) to team members. As the days leading up to the move to cut staff, each team member would report out in detail what they were going to do and when they were going to do it. As a group, we incorrectly assumed by sharing the details of our planning that we would have individual accountability to the group. As I reflect on the situation, I feel the individual accountability and cross-team cooperation was a foundational element for the team. When we each realized we did not have this foundation, we lost our footing. When the stability of this footing was lost, the group began to escalate the conflict.

Organizational Lessons Over time, as we talked about the incident in small groups, we always discussed how the Head of Products and Marketing and the President were wrong in what they did, but we never looked in the mirror to examine all of the failures that we, as leaders, had that day. Why didn’t any of the other executives go into the restroom and either stop the argument or move the Head of Products and Marketing and the President to another more private room where they could continue their conversation? I do not think it was because we had never seen anything like this before and were stymied on what to do. I also do not believe it was because we did not have the courage to go into the restroom and confront both the Head

164    Timothy Hough of Products and Marketing and the President. It was because, at that moment, we forgot what was required of us to be Servant Leaders. In their study on who makes a good leader, Gächter, Nosenzo, Renner, and Sefton (2012) point out that among other traits, leading-by-example is a way a leader can influence followers in an organization. Gächter et al. (2012) also point out in their study that effective leadership will depend on the leader’s beliefs and preferences. During the incident, the choices of the leaders involved were not to engage in the heated argument in the restroom. It was also the preferences of the leaders involved to not address the incident as a group or to the broader organization. This failure to lead-by-example may have contributed to the Head of Products and Marketing and the President leaving the organization.

Conclusion There were many leadership failures after the incident had occurred. The most significant and most glaring was that the event was never talked about, either one-on-one or in the group. There was no closure, no apologies, no explanation, nothing. No reason was given to all of the people who witnessed or heard the altercation. The entire company went on as if nothing ever happened even though we all knew it had. The executive team was not the examples we had wanted to be to the company. We also did not model what servant leaders should do when they make a mistake. At a minimum, we should have addressed the issue with the entire company, apologized, and reminded the employees that we were still human and that we sometimes make mistakes. We should have committed publicly to doing better and to holding ourselves to a higher standard. None of this happened because we pretended the incident did not occur. The executive team was never the same after what happened. Sure, we all tried to work together as best we could, but there was underlying resentment within the group. Within the year of the incident happening, the Head of Products and Marketing and the President of the company left to pursue other opportunities. The other executives who stayed would often talk about the incident and relive what we all experienced. Never once did any of us ask what we, as servant leaders, should have done differently that day, and, in my opinion, that is, still one of our biggest leadership failures. We did not try to learn from our mistakes.

References Fehr, R., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012). The forgiving organization: A multilevel model of forgiveness at work. Academy of Management Review, 37(4), 664–688. doi:10.5465/ amr.2010.0497 Gächter, S., Nosenzo, D., Renner, E., & Sefton, M. (2012). Who makes a good leader? cooperativeness, optimism, and leading-by-example. Economic Inquiry, 50(4), 953–953. Glasl, F. (1982). The process of conflict escalation and roles of third parties. Conflict Management and Industrial Relations, 119–140. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-1132-6_6

No Rest in the Restroom    165 Jordan, T. (2000, October). Glasl’s nine-stage model of conflict escalation. Retrieved from https://www.mediate.com/articles/jordan.cfm. Accessed on July 1, 2020. Rahim, M. A. (1983). A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 368–376. Sonntag, A., & Zizzo, D. J. (2019). Personal accountability and cooperation in teams. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 158, 428–448. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2018.12.014 Wong, A., Liu, Y., Wang, X., & Tjosvold, D. (2016). Servant leadership for team conflict management, co-ordination, and customer relationships. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 56(2), 238–259. doi:10.1111/1744-7941.12135

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 16

The Demise of a Company: An Insider’s Personal and Scholarly Reflection Dorianne Cotter-Lockard Abstract The time has come to reflect on the warning signs, decisions made, and repercussions of those in leadership of a financial services company which collapsed in the wake of the financial crisis during the mid-2000’s. The author was a divisional technology executive of this firm at the time, close enough to the top of the organization to observe the actions of those in charge. The author’s observations over a period of years eventually led her to resign from her position to enter a doctoral program only a few weeks before the company’s demise. The impetus behind the author’s resignation was her feeling that the decisions and actions of those in leadership violated her personal values. In this account, the author offers her personal reflections and the repercussions of this experience, followed by a deconstruction of this tragic leadership failure which includes references to the leadership literature. Keywords: Arrogance; combative corporate culture; corporate lifecycle; founder succession; risk-taking; workplace bullying

Introduction This story begins several years before this organization’s progression of leadership failures occurred. Many smaller leadership breakdowns occurred along the way. The momentum of failures increased over time to such a point that I felt compelled to leave the company. This story is told from my perspective, in the present moment. Therefore, I have reconstructed this story according to my filters and biases (Aronson & Aronson, 2018). I acknowledge that other perspectives exist and others had different experiences and reactions to the same events. When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 167–178 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211016

168    Dorianne Cotter-Lockard I do not intend to blame or shame anyone. I took time to work through my emotions and reactions to this story, and am grateful to have the opportunity now that many years have passed to tell this story and examine it for lessons related to leadership.

My Story I joined this financial services organization when it was still relatively small, around 11,000 employees. I managed a technology department at that time of around 125 employees and contractors. My immediate challenge was to hire enough people to modify programs for Y2K (Year 2000). My training as a consultant with a well-regarded management consultant firm influenced my management style. During my first month in my role, I developed a strategic plan for my organization which focused on service to the business, increased professionalism, and development of team members to provide a high level of technology quality and service. My organization grew to 450 people in concert with the growth of the company, after which time the leadership team added another organization to my responsibilities, bringing the total to 850 people.

In the Beginning: A Thriving Workplace My colleagues (the CFO, COO, and Head of Operations) supported me and showed interest in the initiatives which we implemented within our IT organization. My manager, the divisional CEO, boasted of having the best systems in the industry, which could handle large volumes of customer accounts. He adopted a hands-off attitude toward me, trusting the partnership between me and my business peers. In the beginning, I had little interaction with the most senior level of management at the firm – that changed over time. My colleagues across the company exhibited an intense sense of pride and belonging. For many, this firm was their first and only company – their entire careers depended on its success. People felt strong ownership of the firm, which originated in a garage and was recognized for innovation in its field. The founder loved to tell stories about the company’s history and milestones. We celebrated each new milestone, whether it was the number of accounts or dollar amount of assets, and the milestones accelerated over time. During the first several years of my tenure, we created an organizational development laboratory within our IT division, experimenting with different aspects of structure and processes. For example, we developed core values for our organization from the bottom-up, with small focus groups totaling 350 people. Then we surveyed our entire organization to determine employee alignment with the values and assess how well we lived those values. Next, a team comprised of nonmanagement staff developed a rewards and recognition program based on the values. We used our values, in addition to other criteria, for hiring, promotion, and performance evaluation processes. We implemented a quality measurement program which earned an award from a measurement excellence conference. We created our own internal recruitment

Demise of a Company    169 and training programs for recent college graduates and promising employees from the business units. Our team instituted a re-tooling program to help programers transition to new technologies, along with a mentoring program to support them. We established peer-group and cross-organization teams to enhance 360-degree communication. During a three-year period, our employee turnover rate fell from 32% to 4%, and Gartner Research highlighted our division twice in case studies of high-performing IT organizations (Berry & Walker, 2006). These organizational innovations were not lost on my colleagues within the larger operations division. Together, we replicated many of the concepts and organizational innovations across operations. I invited my business peers to accompany me to conferences at IBM and Gartner so we could learn the latest trends and best practices together. We implemented many of these ideas in partnership across the larger organization. The former CEO of the division retired, and our COO became the divisional CEO. As a united operations leadership team, we co-created a safe space for innovation and individuality. I felt that I belonged in the business division, I felt at home with my IT organization, and deeply connected with my colleagues. Most of our IT projects succeeded. When we were not successful, we owned our failures and admitted them. I felt pride and fulfillment in our many achievements.

Combative Corporate Culture We accomplished this despite the culture at the top of the company. Senior management exemplified an “alpha-male wins all” culture. The mode of communication included yelling, name-calling, and lobbying insults at subordinates. I recall one strategic planning meeting with the senior executives in which a top leader told another divisional leader that, “my 14-year-old daughter could write a better strategic plan.” I heard one famous story (a first-hand account told by a colleague) of an executive who demanded that everyone stay past midnight until they finished a report for him. He apparently barred the exit with his imposing presence until the report materialized. My own first conversation with the CEO of the company illustrates the combative stance of the leadership. I sat at a circular table with colleagues while enjoying breakfast on the veranda at our offsite strategic planning meeting. This was my first invitation to attend a firm-wide strategic planning session with the senior executives of each division. The CEO seated himself at our table while one of my colleagues introduced us. The CEO had already heard about me, and he launched into an interrogative interview. Among other questions, he asked me what I thought about the company which acquired my former employer. The acquiring company had made a play to acquire his firm as well. I offered an honest opinion, saying that I thought the acquirer augmented its market value by buying up smaller firms. Eventually, the company needed to figure out how to profit without this strategy, and likely it would collapse. The CEO liked my response, stating that “no < expletive > way will [company XYZ] ever buy us!” He then rose and walked away to get some coffee. My male colleagues gave me a “high five,” saying “you passed!”

170    Dorianne Cotter-Lockard A year or two later, the company’s leadership announced their most ambitious strategy. Key phrases in the strategy included several instances of the word dominate. I squirmed whenever I read those phrases. The strategy contradicted some of the original messages which attracted me to the company, namely that we were helping regular people to achieve the American Dream.

Growth, Ambition, and Succession During the early 2000s, the company grew quickly. New types of financial instruments and risky product offerings became popular during this time. Since I worked in the back-office division, the senior leaders of the firm tasked us with handling the repercussions of decisions made by the sales organization. The business division that my team supported produced quarterly reports on loan default rates for each year’s book of business. We discussed these at our business division meetings, then provided the reports to the sales organization. In the mid-2000’s, we began to see a rapid rise in default rates, foreclosures, and bankruptcy claims from customers. We advised the sales team to stop pushing risky loan types and to focus on selling more standard loans. Our advice was ignored. Leadership at the top of the company commenced a detailed succession planning process along with an executive development program. I participated in both. The succession plan specified that the founder–CEO would step down in a year and the then-current President would become the new CEO. The President served as a leader with the company for more than 20 years. He came from an accounting background, and his leadership approach was fiscally conservative. Surprisingly for a company of our size, the President on occasion took the time to sit down with me and go through my entire project list to understand the investments our division made in technology!

Decisions and Disillusionment After a year, the CEO announced that he would not leave the company. I surmise that he sensed the impending challenges to the company’s fortunes and decided he needed to stay at the helm to guide it through stormy waters. What happened next caused me and others in the company considerable consternation. The President was asked to resign with a non-compete agreement, and the company appointed the lead sales executive as the new President. I saw the former President as a role-model. He was respectful in his communication, thoughtful, cautious, and fiscally responsible. Soon after the former President left, leadership invited the CIO of the firm who was aligned with the former President, to leave. At this point, I remember saying to my divisional colleagues of the founder–CEO, that “he’s going to take the whole ship down with him.” The new President and his team took an aggressive sales and leadership approach. The level of arrogance and insults rose to new levels within this team. These men were cognitively brilliant. I and others across the company could not fault their brilliance – intelligence was highly valued within the company.

Demise of a Company    171 The  new President’s favored head of technology became the new CIO and he moved all technology divisions to report centrally to him (in the past, technology groups reported to divisional CEO’s). The climate during technology meetings became tense. When the new CIO expressed his displeasure about something during meetings, I observed my new peers cowering like beta members of a wolf-pack to the alpha-male. I attempted to maintain a positive relationship with my new boss, suggesting ways (in private) to have more productive conversations during meetings. To give him credit, he did listen to what I had to say, and he made some efforts to be more respectful during meetings. I suspect that he realized it would be wise to pay attention since I was the only female leader on his team. I took steps to maintain balance in my personal life; I remained active with my spiritual community as well as serving on a non-profit board. My spiritual practice included 30 minutes of daily meditation. It was during this time period, around 2006, that I began to gain clarity of my work situation as a result of my meditation practice. The internal wisdom which surfaced during my meditations said, “get out of there,” indicating that I should leave my position at the firm. I discerned an incongruence between my personal values and my observations of events at the firm, and I felt a sense of impending disaster. I began to think about my options for the future, as well as consider who might replace me from within my organization. Then came “the last straw” for me. A hallmark of our offices around the country included prominent displays of our company timeline on the walls. The timelines showed photos of the founders in the early days, along with milestones and key executives such as the former President. One day, I noticed that the timelines looked different. The timelines no longer contained photos of the former President. No one spoke about this change, but I felt violated that the firm expunged someone from the company’s narrative who made a significant contribution to the company’s success for more than 20 years. I believe this was the tipping point for me in my decision to leave the company. First, there were the ignored messages regarding unsustainable sales of risky products, then there was the decision to oust the former President and put in place more aggressive, risk-taking executives. Next, my own direct management changed, and finally the firm erased the corporate memory of a leader whom I highly respected. I put plans in place for my succession, ensuring that management had a choice between two qualified successors, then I applied to a doctoral program in human and organizational development. I gave six weeks’ notice of my resignation.

Resignation, Road-Trip, and Collapse I left in July 2007. My husband and I decided to take a road-trip from California through Utah, Montana, and into Canada to visit friends and national parks. On our way home, while driving down the west coast from Seattle, we heard radio reports of the eruption of a financial crisis. Within a few weeks, my former company virtually collapsed and was bought by a larger firm which was,

172    Dorianne Cotter-Lockard in turn, bailed out by the US government. The acquirer of my former company hired me as a consultant for the next two years to help manage the integration of the systems between the two companies. Witnessing the dismantling of my former company first-hand caused me great pain. Almost all my peers lost their jobs within the first year. The media blamed senior managers of my former company for the crisis. My former colleagues and I went through the typical stages of grieving (Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005). First, I felt disbelief that my former company was the main party blamed for the financial debacle. I believed the former CEO’s quotes in the press. We did not do anything wrong! Next, I felt anger and sadness to see everything we built during the prior dozen years dismantled by the acquiring company. Finally, I felt a deep sense of shame which lasted for years. When asked about my experience as an executive, I could not bring myself to mention the name of my former firm. By that time, my peers, colleagues, and many of the managers who worked for me moved on to a new company founded by a former executive. I eventually reached acceptance. One day, a wise colleague – friend said to me, you know, you did a lot of great things at that company that you should be proud of, and you had a positive impact on hundreds, if not thousands of people across the company, the company’s partners, and its customers. Get over it and let go of the shame!

Discussion: Leadership Lessons In this section, I deconstruct my experience by first examining seven habits of unsuccessful people (Finkelstein, 2003) in relation to this case scenario. Next, I identify three leadership lessons from this experience which are common to leadership failures. The lessons are as follows: (1) unhealthy values and behaviors lead to organizational failure; (2) arrogance leads to dismissiveness and unwarranted risk-taking; and (3) entrepreneurial founders’ reluctance to allow succession prevents healthy organizational evolution. I substantiate my points with research literature related to these themes. I use the personal pronouns, he and his throughout my discussion because the top leadership of the firm in question were men.

Habits of Unsuccessful Leaders Finkelstein’s (2003) research identified that “spectacularly unsuccessful people” demonstrate at least five of seven common habits (p. 213). These include: 1. They see themselves and their companies as dominating their environments (p. 214). 2. They identify with the company so that there is no clear boundary between their personal interests and their corporation’s interests (p. 218). 3. They think they have all the answers (p. 223). 4. They ruthlessly eliminate anyone who isn’t 100% behind them (p. 226).

Demise of a Company    173 5. They are consummate company spokespersons, obsessed with the company image (p. 227). 6. They underestimate major obstacles (p. 231). 7. They stubbornly rely on what worked for them in the past (p. 235). First, the leaders of my firm declared a strategy to “dominate the industry.” According to Finkelstein (2003), such leaders “vastly overestimate the extent to which they are controlling events” posed by the competitive and economic environment (p. 214). Related to healthy boundaries between the CEO and the company, he saw himself as inseparable from the firm’s identity, as demonstrated by his unwillingness to step down according to the succession plan. Thus, the CEO made decisions based on his personal interests rather than the best interest of the company and its customers. In addition, the senior leadership team believed that they could address the firm’s challenges because of their brilliance and past achievements. However, their belief system did not allow dissenting viewpoints or data. These men were intelligent from an IQ perspective, and they made significant achievements. From a human development perspective, we know that IQ is not the only form of intelligence (Gardner, 1999; Prasad, 2016; Wilson & Mujtaba, 2010). Emotional intelligence (EQ) research shows that a lack of EQ skills such as empathy contribute to lower productivity and innovation within organizations (Boyatzis et al., 2012; Lee & Wong, 2019). These leaders lacked EQ skills such as empathy and emotional self-control, thus discouraging employees to speak up regarding risks and challenges to the firm. Regarding habit #4, the firm ousted the former president after he devoted more than 20 years of his talents to the company. Other key leaders left, and the subsequent re-organization instituted executives who were in complete alignment with top leadership. Finkelstein (2003) says, “by eliminating all dissenting and contrasting viewpoints, they cut themselves off from their best chance of correcting problems as they arise” (p. 227). In addition, the CEO defended the company image at every opportunity as he made good use of the media. Finally, even though the warning signs in the industry were clear, the firm’s top leaders misjudged the risks and potential impacts of their decisions.

Lesson #1: Unhealthy Values and Behaviors Lead to Organizational Failure According to Schein (2017), the structures of organizational culture derive from a “pattern or system of beliefs, values, and behavioral norms that come to be taken for granted as basic assumptions and eventually drop out of awareness” (p. 6). Although values may be explicitly stated in company mission statements, often there are differences between the espoused values and the demonstrated values of an organization. Demonstrated values are based on underlying assumptions which lie deep in the subconscious of an organization’s culture. In the case of this firm, the values demonstrated through leaders’ behaviors included intelligence, innovation, dominance, aggression, and risk-taking.

174    Dorianne Cotter-Lockard From a positive viewpoint, cognitive intelligence as a value can attract talented, creative individuals who innovate, improve quality, reduce costs, and discover new markets. However, there is a shadow side to valuing intelligence: arrogance. Johnson et al. (2010) defined arrogance “as a set of behaviors that communicates a person’s exaggerated sense of superiority, which is often accomplished by disparaging others” (p. 405). In my story I provided examples in which leaders belittled members of the organization. These behaviors can also be characterized as bullying. Boddy (2010), drawing on the work of Dierickx (2004) and Djurkovic, McCormack, and Casimir (2004), stated that bullying “includes behavior designed to belittle others via humiliation, sarcasm, rudeness, overworking an employee, threats, and violence” (Boddy, 2010, p. 367). The leaders of my organization exhibited all these behaviors except violence. Bullying in the workplace can negatively impact individuals and teams (Boddy, 2010; Harvey et al., 2007). Recent studies support the conclusion that bullying in the workplace leads to emotional exhaustion and employee silence as a coping response (Rai & Agarwal, 2018; Xu, Loi, & Lam, 2015). Workplace bullying can also impact the cohesiveness of work groups, as witnesses to bullying behaviors might align with the bully because they fear retaliation if they were to defend the victim (Park & Ono, 2017). Victims may begin to feel isolated from their team as a result (Zapf, 1999). Bullying behaviors by the leaders of my former organization shut down those who had important or useful information to guide the organization through its challenges. Furthermore, according to Ma and Karri (2005), “arrogance leads to complacency and, as a result, firms develop blind spots to threats in the competitive environment … and create illusions that they are invincible” (p. 68). This conclusion brings us to our next leadership lesson, dismissing the messengers of unwanted news.

Lesson #2: Arrogance Leads to Dismissiveness and Unwarranted Risk-taking In a study aimed at developing a scale to measure organizational arrogance, Herbin’s (2018) definition of organizational arrogance includes “dismissiveness toward internal and external organizational matters, and disparagement toward intraorganizational and interorganizational members” (p. 10). Furthermore, if a leader dismisses a colleague’s voice in a derogatory manner, the leader demonstrates a need to establish their superiority (Milyavsky, Krunglanski, ­Chemikova, & Schori-Eyal, 2017). Despite regular reports delivered to management with detailed financial analyses regarding rising loan defaults, top leadership ignored our warnings. Since my IT organization served a division that provided customer service and back-office functions, we directly encountered the pain suffered by customers who could no longer afford to make payments due to rising rates. As a result of this situation, I felt distressed and disempowered. Dismissal of undesirable news as a result of arrogance allows leaders to continue their course of action, often taking risks that put an organization in

Demise of a Company    175 jeopardy of dissolution. Risk-taking is another value which has constructive and destructive aspects. Risk-taking is often necessary to enable innovation (­Norton & Moore, 2006). Risk-taking and innovation were highly valued aspects of my firm’s culture. However, taking risks in the face of data which contradicts a given strategy can lead to failure (Linstead, Maréchal, & Griffin, 2014; Robertson & Sullivan, 2009; Schoemaker & Day, 2009).

Lesson #3: Entrepreneurial Founders’ Reluctance to Allow Succession Prevents Healthy Organizational Evolution The decision of the CEO–founder to remain, even though a detailed succession plan was in place for some time, could have one of several root causes. I surmised that the CEO of my firm sensed rough waters ahead for the company and wanted to ensure the future of the company. A more common reason could be the inability for a founder to step away from his creation. According to Adizes (2004), companies go through normal stages of development through a corporate lifecycle. As organizations move into the stage of “adolescence” (p. 76), they begin to establish systems, processes, procedures, and a more professional approach to management. This was the case for my firm. Senior leadership established a regular strategic planning process, brought in a consulting firm to implement a leadership development program, and developed policies and procedures. I welcomed this evolutionary step, contributing to the process while engaging my own management team to develop our own planning and organizational structures and processes. Adizes (2004) stated that the adolescent phase of a company’s life is stormy due to internal conflicts which result from growth and change. During adolescence, internal conflict arises between risk-takers and those who put structure and systems in place. The founder must be willing to let go of his “absolute monarchy” and allow decision authority to be decentralized (p. 70). As an organization transitions to this stage, the founder must be willing to step down and allow professional management to take his place. According to Adizes, it “is rare that a king voluntarily yields his absolute power” (p. 76). In the case of my company, the founder allowed risk-takers to retain control of the company’s strategy instead of handing the reigns over to a professional management team that would ensure stability and structure.

My Personal Lessons Lessons are available in every life experience if one chooses to learn. I realized my own lessons from this experience. First, I discovered that it is possible to create a thriving sub-organization despite unhealthy leadership behaviors by senior leaders at the top of the larger organization. In a study conducted by Nel, (2019), results demonstrated “a significant negative relationship between workplace bullying and flourishing” (p. 1), and that employees can tap into their personal resources such as EQ capabilities, to mitigate the effects of bullying, thus enabling workplace flourishing.

176    Dorianne Cotter-Lockard Second, I learned to listen to my inner wisdom which directed me to follow my personal guiding principles and values. I value communication transparency, open dialog, and continuous learning within organizations. I value integrity, which is the congruence between publicly stated values and the actions of those in leadership. Furthermore, I value honoring each person’s voice in a context of respect and openness to diverse viewpoints. Following one’s guiding principles is not easy to do, given the daily pressures in a toxic work environment. Courage is required. I remember being pressured for years to contribute to the company’s political action committee (PAC) – leadership expected all executives to participate. Since I disagreed with the aims and lobbying activities of the PAC, I declined, despite being called “a tree-hugging liberal.” As each aspect of leadership failure continued to deviate from what I valued most in an organization, I turned toward my decision to leave. A third personal lesson is that shame is unnecessary, though the grieving process is required. If I were to replay this experience, I would have transcended the shame by consciously working through a grieving process. As part of my personal life philosophy, I believe that painful experiences can lead to learning and personal evolution. Finally, my experience in creating a thriving organization within a context which exemplified the antithesis of thriving drove me to study human development, leadership, and organizational systems. This experience provided the push I needed to release my status quo career journey as a technology leader to venture into the academic world. My research in the arena of team collaboration gave me the opportunity to explore how we connect with and listen to each other, and to discern which elements enable effective collaboration. I continue to explore authentic leadership; I now teach mindful leadership at the graduate level. Hopefully, my students benefit as a result.

Conclusion This essay explored one person’s experience with a case of leadership failure. I hope that the leadership lessons in this discussion will guide and support future leaders and teachers of leaders to create organizations which thrive and benefit all stakeholders, including the planet.

References Adizes, I. (2004). Managing corporate lifecycles: how to get to and stay at the top. Santa Barbara, CA: The Adizes Institute Publishing. Aronson, E., & Aronson, J. (2018). The social animal (12th ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers. Berry, D., & Walker, A. (2006, August 1). Building the high performing IT organization through people. Gartner Research Report. ID: G00207638. Boddy, C. R. (2010). Corporate psychopaths, bullying and unfair supervision in the workplace. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 367–379. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0689-5

Demise of a Company    177 Boyatzis, R. E., Passarelli, A. M., Koenig, K., Lowe, M., Mathew, B., Stoller, J. K., & Phillips, M. (2012). Examination of the neural substrates activated in memories of experiences with resonant and dissonant leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(2), 259–272. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.08.003 Dierickx, C. (2004). The bully employee: A survival guide for supervisors. SuperVision, 65(3), 6–7. Djurkovic, N., McCormack, D., & Casimir, G. (2004). The physical and psychological effects of workplace bullying and their relationship to intention to leave: A test of the psychosomatic and disability hypotheses. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 7(4), 469–497. Finkelstein, S. (2003). Why smart executives fail and what we can learn from their mistakes. New York, NY: Portfolio. Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York, NY: BasicBooks. Harvey, M. G., Buckley, M. R., Heames, J. T., Zinko, R., Brouer, R. L., & Ferris, G. R. (2007). A bully as an archetypal destructive leader. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 14(2), 117–129. Herbin, C. V. (2018). Measuring organizational arrogance: Development and validation of a theory-based instrument (Order No. 10825534). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2054025531). Johnson, R., Silverman, S., Shyamsunder, A., Swee, H., Rodopman, O., & Bauer, E. (2010). Acting superior but actually inferior? Correlates and consequences of workplace arrogance. Human Performance, 23, 403–427. doi:10.1080/08959285.2010. 515279 Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. (2005). On grief and grieving: Finding the meaning of grief through the five stages of loss. New York, NY: Scribner. Lee, C., & Wong, C.-S. (2019). The effect of team emotionazl intelligence on team process and effectiveness. Journal of Management and Organization, 25(6), 844–859. doi:10.1017/jmo.2017.43 Linstead, S., Maréchal, G., & Griffin, R. W. (2014). Theorizing and researching the dark side of organization. Organization Studies, 35(2), 165–188. doi:10.1177/0170840613515402 Ma, H., & Karri, R. (2005). Leaders beware: Some sure ways to lose your competitive advantage. Organizational Dynamics, 34(1), 63–76. Milyavsky, M., Krunglanski, A., Chemikova, M., & Schori-Eyal, N. (2017). Evidence of arrogance: On the relative importance of expertise, outcome, and manner. PloS ONE, 12(7), 1–31. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0180420 Nel, E. C. (2019). The impact of workplace bullying on flourishing: The moderating role of emotional intelligence. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, A1603, 1-9. Retrieved from https://sajip.co.za/index.php/sajip/article/view/1603 Norton, W. I., & Moore, W. T. (2006). The influence of entrepreneurial risk assessment on venture launch or growth decisions. Small Business Economics, 26(3), 215–226. Park, J. H., & Ono, M. (2017). Effects of workplace bullying on work engagement and health: The mediating role of job insecurity. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(22), 3202–3225. doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1155164 Prasad, M. (2016). Exploration of Gardner’s multiple intelligences of medical professionals. Sumedha Journal of Management, 5(4), 53–61. Rai, A., & Agarwal, U. A. (2018). Workplace bullying and employee silence: A moderated mediation model of psychological contract violation and workplace friendship. Personnel Review, 47(1), 226–256. doi:10.1108/PR-03-2017-0071 Robertson, T. J., & Sullivan, L. L. (2009). Bad boys of business make for bad business decisions: A study in ethics. Southern Journal of Business and Ethics, 1, 87–100. Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership. The Jossey-Bass Business & Management Series. Kindle Edition. London: Wiley.

178    Dorianne Cotter-Lockard Schoemaker, P. J. H., & Day, G. S. (2009). How to make sense of weak signals. MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(3), 81–89. Wilson, S. D., & Mujtaba, B. G. (2010). The relationship between leadership and multiple intelligences with the 21st century’s higher education faculty. The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 11(3), 106–120. Xu, A. J., Loi, R., & Lam, L. W. (2015). The bad boss takes it all: How abusive supervision and leader–member exchange interact to influence employee silence. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), 763–774. Zapf, D. (1999). Organisational, work group related and personal causes of mobbing/bullying at work. International Journal of Manpower, 20(1), 70–85. doi:10.1108/01437729910268669

Chapter 17

Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader Terry Fernsler Abstract A change in leadership can often be stressful for an organization. Miriam, the Founding Executive Director of a supporting foundation for a rural hospital, was primarily a servant leader, providing volunteers and staff with the tools needed for successful fundraising. As the initial Executive Director for this small nonprofit organization, she established an organizational culture that fit the needs of the community; volunteers became accustomed to that culture and the organization flourished. Upon Miriam’s retirement, her replacement brought a very different type of leadership rooted in hierarchical structures and authoritarianism. Accustomed to a more supportive organizational culture, many volunteers flatly refused to work with the new executive director. He exacerbated the problem by refusing to acknowledge any missteps he might have taken and was not receptive to any ideas not his own. He was not supportive of staff or even the organization’s own board members. The new executive director was accustomed to being in control and misunderstood managing the needs of multiple stakeholders. He moved too quickly to consolidate his own power without consideration of the organization’s needs. He tried to instill a “heroic” leadership style in a culture of shared leadership. The credibility of the organization suffered as a result, not only among volunteers and hospital staff, but, as they talked within the community, publically as well. Keywords: Founder; organizational culture; servant leadership; authoritarian leader; executive transition; nonprofit

When Leadership Fails: Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences, 179–189 Copyright © 2021 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved doi:10.1108/978-1-80043-766-120211017

180    Terry Fernsler

Introduction A change in leadership can often be stressful for an organization, particularly when leadership styles are very different. Organizational culture may clash with the new leader’s methods and norms. Developing a clear transition strategy will help ease the stress and confusion. Miriam, as the founder of a supporting foundation for a small rural hospital, established its structure and culture. Miriam was primarily a servant leader and volunteers and staff responded well to her leadership style, so well that it became the norm. When Miriam retired three years after beginning the foundation, her replacement had an entirely different leadership style. The culture of inviting community members to contribute their skills, knowledge, and creativity gave way to a very directive style. By misunderstanding – or trying to ignore – the organizational and community culture, her replacement was unable to motivate key stakeholders and even lost some. Much of the turmoil from the transition could have been prevented with self-assessment and proper planning.

Miriam’s Servant Leadership Miriam and her partner arrived in a rural western state after retiring from careers in the Bay Area of California. The Hospital Administrator of the anchor institution in a local public hospital district, Bob, had learned of Miriam’s talents through his community engagement efforts, and asked her if she would be interested in running a foundation for the hospital. The organizing documents for the foundation had already been drafted by community volunteers and they were seeking an executive director to lead it. Miriam and her husband needed the additional income, so she stepped out of retirement to start the foundation. Bob took a laissez-faire approach to supervising Miriam, relying on her expertise in fundraising. Miriam began by mapping community assets and determining what could be used to effectively raise funds to support the hospital. She held estate planning seminars to plant the seed for planned gifts to the foundation. She discovered a market for a thrift store in the community, whose profits could be contributed to support the foundation. She was able to arrange a loan from the hospital to establish the store and found a large, empty storefront on one of the main streets in the hospital’s town that had recently housed a department store. It was in an ideal location and she hired a very capable store manager. The store was such a success that the start-up loan was repaid in full in nine months. Miriam was very much a servant leader (Greenleaf, 1970), providing staff and volunteers with the tools needed to develop their capacities and reach their highest potential to successfully carry out the mission of the foundation. Three hospital guilds, which predated the foundation and were fairly autonomous from the hospital governance, were already supporting the hospital through special fundraising events in the community and operating a gift shop in the hospital. Miriam encouraged the three guilds to continue their long-standing models of hospital support and offered support when needed. However, she did not force them to change anything they had been doing for decades, acknowledging their work and important community connections they had developed over the years.

Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader    181 When one hospital employee suggested a holiday festival, Miriam encouraged and mentored that staff person, Stephanie. Stephanie, was an administrative assistant and receptionist, a job with set hours that did not require taking work home. She found herself with much free time outside of work while her husband, a long-haul trucker, was away. Stephanie had read about other hospitals in the region that were raising money through festivals of trees. Festivals of trees are events in which trees and wreaths are decorated by artistically talented volunteers, displayed for a week during a series of small events and ultimately auctioned off in a culminating event. Such festivals were becoming popular as hospital fundraisers in the region and typically involved the coordination of many volunteers. Stephanie took ownership of the festival of trees planning as Miriam guided her through the proposal. When the foundation board of directors approved it, Stephanie continued by coordinating the events. Stephanie was bright and attractive. She was also difficult to work with because she was so exacting. This was an excellent quality for her hospital administrative position, but Stephanie was very precise in knowing what she wanted to do for the festival. This was not always appreciated by the more creative volunteer decorators. Since Stephanie was new to organizing events, she required much time and attention from Miriam to help her learn to work with others. Even mild-mannered Miriam, who understood the value of detail in planning events and seemed to get along with everyone, often found Stephanie tedious. The first festival of trees for the foundation, held in November prior to the holiday season, was really a festival of tree, since only one volunteer team (from one of the guilds) had been recruited to decorate a tree. Miriam’s style required much time in cultivating and nurturing relationships with volunteers, so after only a year and a half, the foundation had grown enough that she needed full-time assistance with the fundraising initiatives. She hired me as the new Associate Director of Development. My tasks were to help expand existing fundraising events while Miriam continued to work at coordinating the fundraising efforts of the three hospital guilds and merging them into the activities of the foundation. She also continued to market the foundation in the wider community, especially to prospective major donors. Miriam assigned me to work with Stephanie to grow the festival of trees for year two. I spent the time necessary to coach Stephanie, helping her balance her ability to plan in detail with developing relationships that could contribute to success. It took a lot of coaching but Stephanie began to gain respect from the community in spite of her blunt manner – or perhaps because people saw how determined she was. It also helped that as she gained acknowledgment of the success of her efforts, she became less abrupt. Her determination for success made her more willing to learn to build an ever more appealing event. I found modeling Miriam’s servant leadership style toward Stephanie time consuming but rewarding to see her grow and recruit more volunteers. The second festival of trees had six teams decorating trees. Although her position was as staff (Development Director) at the hospital, Miriam also reported to the foundation’s volunteer board of directors and drew on the board members’ knowledge and willingness to volunteer. With additional help from my new position, some board members suggested additional fundraising opportunities. One, Bill, an insurance agent who was also a local Boy Scout

182    Terry Fernsler troop leader who knew many families in the community, wanted to start a golf tournament. Miriam assigned me to work with Bill to plan it, demonstrating confidence in my ability to work with others who some people considered “difficult.” Bill had a bit of an ego problem, something I managed by letting him come up with ideas for the golf tournament and receiving credit for its success while I did the detail work. I saw my role as supporting Bill through his event. I quickly recognized Bill’s needs were different than Stephanie’s and once again, without even realizing I was doing it, I began emulating Miriam’s servant leadership by giving him the tools for success. I started my position in February and the golf tournament was held in July. While not a grand affair, Bill pointed out that the event was well attended and turned a profit its first summer, even though we had less than six months to organize it. He imagined what could happen with more time to plan. He convinced the rest of the board of directors to consider and approve a golf tournament for the next summer. Bill successfully tapped the board members for their community connections to support the next tournament. Both events raised net revenues for the foundation, increased visibility tremendously, and helped boost the reputations of their volunteer coordinators. I was able to work well with both Bill and Stephanie, carefully cultivating relationships with each. Stephanie needed someone to talk to, and both wanted to accomplish successes for the foundation. As I became more comfortable with these tasks, Miriam and I began discussing new projects. An endowment that she had begun was growing, and nearly two years after its establishment it was large enough to talk to investment advisors about how to invest the corpus. An ad hoc endowment committee was created, and someone was needed to staff it. I expressed the belief to Miriam that investments should be screened for health concerns, since the foundation represented a health care facility. Miriam asked me to develop a proposal and present it to the committee. With her guidance, I presented a convincing investment argument, supported strongly by the board’s two financial experts – Bill and the Treasurer, Laurie. Laurie began pushing for a more active planned giving program to increase the endowment even further. Miriam had not been able to find time for proper follow-up with attendees of the estate planning seminar. Laurie thought there might be a quicker way to add supporters. She was a certified public accountant (CPA), one of only two in the county’s largest town. Laurie had clients who frequently asked her advice on investing their assets. She knew who among her clients could use the tax benefits of planned gifts, and which clients were interested in supporting the hospital but needed someone else to talk with interested clients about giving to the foundation. While Miriam’s responsibilities did not allow the time (and in some cases, patience) to take the lead staff role for a more robust planned giving program, she supported Laurie’s proposal. It became my responsibility to discuss planned giving with prospective contributors. Laurie would frequently get severe migraine headaches that would keep her from work for days at a time and impact her ability to strategize the planned giving program. After getting to know Laurie I realized that she preferred to keep

Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader    183 busy during her migraines. Miriam was concerned about Laurie’s health, and helped guide me to find a balance that would not pressure Laurie. As my supervisor, Miriam, of course, wanted to know the progress of these activities. Unless I asked her for specific help, she trusted me to coordinate the projects assigned to me and to be sure I had what was needed to succeed. Still, it was common for us both to be working with many of the same volunteers and prospective supporters, so we had a need to coordinate activities and contributor relationships. Miriam expected me to report to her (so she could report to her supervisors) and always kept me updated on her activities. We communicated frequently and bounced suggestions off each other. Miriam helped me learn to speak up when I had knowledge about something that impacted our work, always telling me whether I was doing a good job. Miriam and her husband were going through a property boundary dispute with the board of their homeowners’ association, which began taking her time away from work to negotiate and attend depositions and court hearings. This was taking an emotional toll on her. I was a single parent at the time and found myself taking time off during regular working hours as well. I would often leave work early on weekdays, but was always willing to work late on days my child was with his mother, including most weekends. This scheduling flexibility was frustrating to Miriam, yet she admitted I got the work done, and usually more than expected. After working for a year and a half together, Miriam retired from the foundation. She held an exit interview with me, her employee, which is quite unusual and impressed me very much. It is not uncommon to conduct exit interviews of staff when they take positions elsewhere, supervisors rarely take the time to have an exit interview with their staff when they leave. The first thing she said in the interview was that she wished she had held me to regular hours. My response was that I would not have been able to focus on the job as well if I was concerned with my child’s care, and compared it to her situation with the property boundary dispute; if she had not been able to take time off needed to attend hearings, she could not have focused on her job as well. She admitted that was a good point, demonstrating her flexibility to help staff do their best work.

The Transition from Servant Leadership to Authoritarian Leadership Miriam’s replacement, Graham, was not so supportive of staff or volunteers. This was Graham’s first executive director position and he was very interested in establishing a name for himself. Graham distrusted the abilities of others. He wanted to direct the activities of the guilds himself, for example, ignoring the institutionalized knowledge, community goodwill they had developed, and their deep roots in the community. The guilds, which for many years enjoyed autonomy, only reluctantly worked with him when Bob threatened to evict their gift shop from the hospital. Graham constantly pushed the thrift store manager to increase sales. She, in turn, made it clear to Graham that his knowledge of retail was limited. Graham also set to undermining my work, criticizing it at every opportunity, particularly

184    Terry Fernsler Table 4. Reasonable Cost Guidelines for Solicitation Activities. Solicitation Activity

Reasonable Cost Guidelines

Direct mail (acquisition)

$1.25 to $1.50 per $1.00 raised

Direct mail (renewal)

$0.20 to $0.25 per $1.00 raised

Membership programs

$0.20 to $0.30 per $1.00 raised

Benefit eventsa

$0.50 per $1.00 raiseda

Donor clubs/support groups

$0.20 to $0.30 per $1.00 raised

Volunteer-led solicitations

$0.10 to $0.20 per $1.00 raised

Corporate solicitations

$0.20 per $1.00 raised

Foundation solicitations

$0.20 per $1.00 raised

Capital campaigns

$0.10 to $0.20 per $1.00 raised

Planned giving programs

$0.20 to $0.30 per $1.00 raised

Source: Greenfield (2011). a

Gross revenue and direct costs only.

with his supervisor, Bob. Since I had developed a trusted relationship with the Foundation Board of Directors and other volunteers, he saw me as a threat to his authority. Graham presented himself as egoistical and few hospital staff liked him or, for that matter, asked him for fundraising assistance. The oncology department and the hospital chef, for example, approached me for assistance in writing grants, both refusing to work with Graham. As Graham began to sense their distrust, he developed a group-think attitude (Janis, 1971), listening only to his supervisor for advice. Unfortunately, since Graham attacked my work, I was not inclined to serve as a positive spokesperson for him as I had with Miriam. Instead of seeking to resolve this so we would make a strong team, he imposed his authority even more assertively. Graham equated fundraising with events. Certainly, events create goodwill and increase recognition among the public toward the hospital, making them important components in the foundation’s development strategies. Graham wanted me to drop the planned giving program and focus entirely on the two events, the festival of trees and golf tournament. However, events are one of the least costefficient means of fundraising with high labor and up-front costs. Any nonprofit organization should have a diverse set of fundraising activities. I demonstrated this with a table similar to Table 4. A supporting organization whose primary function is the raising of funds for another nonprofit would reasonably include prospecting activities, such as events, but it should also include low-cost fundraising activities (Fischer, Wilsker, & Young, 2011) such as a planned giving program (Table 4). I reminded Graham that the larger of the events, the festival of trees, netted about $100,000 the previous year, requiring over 2,000 person-hours (staff and volunteer). The planned giving program netted $800,000 in gifts, requiring only 40 person-hours from two people. The low number of hours did not impress

Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader    185 him because the planned gifts would not be realized in the short term. However, pressure from Laurie and the board of directors convinced Graham to continue the planned giving program. Laurie’s insistence made her an adversary in Graham’s eyes, and he set to discrediting her at every opportunity, exploiting her illness by complaining and questioning her commitment when she could not attend meetings and appointments. His tactic ultimately backfired because he did not realize the forgiving nature of the Foundation Board of Directors and the community toward Laurie, who they saw as one of their own. Even people who were sometimes at odds with each other allied to question Graham’s style. Stephanie flatly refused to work with Graham, insisting instead to work with me on the festival of trees. She cited Graham’s inability to work with volunteers (on whom the festival relied tremendously), an apparent lack of knowledge of festivals of trees and certainly the history of her successful festival, and, most importantly, his ego – he was the fundraising authority in his mind and he made that clear to others. The guilds and the hospital staff seeking grants supported Stephanie; even Laurie and the hospital chef, who had previously taken pains to avoid Stephanie because she could be blunt, backed her up. Graham was not supportive of foundation board members’ ideas either, which led to one of the board members to run for election to one of the three public hospital district commissioner positions in order to have more voice with the hospital administrator. The hospital was the anchor institution for a public hospital district, governed by three elected commissioners. The foundation board member who ran for Hospital Commissioner used his community connections and the foundation’s growing reputation to handily win election, much to Graham’s chagrin. Of course, in public, Graham praised the victory, and was quite the sycophant to the newly elected commissioner (but still not the rest of the Foundation board). The Hospital Commissioners subsequently became much more comfortable confronting Graham and Bob’s decision to hire him. The only reason Graham kept his job was because of the unquestioning support Bob gave to top staff, a position Graham had insisted on upon being hired. When Stephanie reported to Bob that she saw Graham take a full case of wine intended for the Festival of Trees for himself, Bob strongly supported Graham and urged Stephanie to learn to work with him better or be replaced as the festival of trees event chair. It was not clear, of course, who could replace her. Graham continued his criticism of me to Bob (but not to me). No longerfeeling supported, I looked for work elsewhere and found it quickly. I gave two weeks’ notice, but the very next day, Graham arranged to immediately compensate me for pay accrued and a two-week advance. He told me to go home and not return for my remaining two weeks. Graham did not replace me for over a year, preferring to manage my responsibilities himself, along with his own.

Leadership Lessons Individuals. Effective leaders make time to reflect on how their behavior affects the organization’s vision, strategy, operations, and performance (Schon, 1984). Then they can be a catalyst for change through symbolism and modeling behavior.

186    Terry Fernsler Miriam, as the founder of the organization, had the advantage of establishing an organizational culture that fit well with her personality of serving as a catalyst for community participation. While new to the community when she started the foundation, Miriam had already established herself as a part of it and understood the local culture. As suggested by McKnight and Block (2010), she made time to reflect on what would work best in the community and how she could best use her own assets, sometimes going beyond her comfort zone. She encouraged others, such as Stephanie and me, to develop our assets as well. Authoritarian leaders such as Graham feel a need to control team members rather than coach them to achieve (White & Lippitt, 1968). They perceive others as followers needing direction rather than as team members, emphasizing that they are in charge. They determine the tasks of followers and remain distant from group discussion about the most effective ways to perform the tasks. Authority figures have low tolerance for ambiguity, confuse their authority with ability, and often do not feel they need others. Ironically, by regarding trust as a sign of weakness, they lose authority. Leaders who rely on an authoritarian style may eventually use influence, power, and control for their own gain to hide their incompetence in participatory situations (Northouse, 2018). They are unwilling to change their mind, even when it becomes very clear that this path escalates commitment to a failing course of action. They denounce and punish anyone who dares propose an alternative course of action (Gabriel, 2011). They do not have the confidence that others will follow them unless they exercise coercive power indiscriminately (Wong & Page, 2003). Like authoritarian leadership, servant leadership can be leader-centric – the leader is regarded as the authority in decision-making. However, Miriam’s s­ ervant leadership emphasized attentiveness to team members’ personal assets and the nurturing of members’ abilities to achieve organizational goals (Greenleaf, 1970). Miriam empowered volunteers and staff because she acknowledged that people want voice. Her influence allowed her to develop an organizational culture that reflected her servant leadership style, her way of carefully thinking through decisions, and working together. In such a participatory culture, where communication skills, advice from specialists, and motivation of team members are valued (power with); the power over approach used by authoritarian leaders exacerbates incompetence. Graham, as someone not inclined toward reflection, was unable to adapt to the culture or change it over time. He was accustomed to being in control and misunderstood how to lead multiple stakeholders. He moved too quickly to try to consolidate his power at the cost of motivated, competent volunteers and staff. Groups. Miriam led the development of an organizational culture of servant leadership, characterized by listening, empathy, holism, awareness, nonjudgmental persuasion, vision, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and community building (Spears, 2002). It was clear to all stakeholders that Miriam supported stakeholder-driven initiatives such as the festival of trees and golf tournament. The culture involved coaching volunteers when necessary, and Miriam expected staff to do the same. This is the culture to which the stakeholders became accustomed.

Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader    187 When groups become accustomed to shared responsibilities, coercive power (power over), will meet with resistance (Northouse, 2018). Authoritarian leadership does have its place; it can be efficient and productive in circumstances in which clarity of the work and goals are needed. However, it also fosters dependence, submissiveness, and loss of individuality. Much of a group’s identity becomes entwined with the authority of the leader. When that happens, any shortcomings are blamed on the leader. When insecure about their ability, authoritarian leaders typically revert to increasing coercive power, especially if power derives from legitimate power or the position. Hurley and Ryman (2003) found that team members under authoritarian leaders feel untrusted and devalued. This disempowers employees and stifles creativity, often resulting in discontent, hostility, or even aggression. Graham did indeed seem to distrust the ideas of others. He was unwilling to cope with the health issues of Laurie. He wanted to turn the guilds into something they were not. He alienated Stephanie who became less willing to cooperate. Graham did not even replace me when I left, preferring to try to carry on my work himself. In return he was not able to motivate staff and volunteers to strive for improvement. Bob, while supportive of both Miriam and Graham, as he believed he should be of his management team, regarded only upper management as part of his team, not the lower-level staff and volunteers. Bob selected Graham because his résumé looked good without considering the needs and desires of key stakeholders. However, Graham tried to instill autocratic control in a shared leadership environment. He was incompetent in the role and overcompensated by exerting more authority over the team, apparently trying to please, and perhaps emulate, only Bob, rather than considering multiple stakeholders as part of the team. Organizations. The credibility of the foundation suffered as a result, not only among volunteers and hospital staff, but, as they talked within the community, publically as well. Schein (2017) indicates that organizational culture change requires a period of unlearning that is psychologically painful. When the authoritarian leader is interested in self-promotion clarity may become a casualty as the organization attempts this unlearning process. Organizational change can be accomplished by eliminating those who carry all the old cultural elements, but in a small community replacing them with people who are better able to adapt to the new style can be difficult. Graham’s attempts to reduce Laurie’s responsibilities, for example, backfired when hospital staff, community members, and even one of the foundation board members resisted. Nonprofit organizations are created to bring people together to accomplish what they cannot alone. Authoritarian leadership can be counterproductive if nonprofit stakeholders are not motivated, or are even demotivated to participate. Many times people new to nonprofit organizations are more familiar with a culture of efficiency and think a nonprofit organizational culture can be molded into an efficient leadership (Beck, Lengnick-Hall, & Lengnick-Hall, 2008). Effective nonprofit leaders, like Miriam, know to be much more cooperative-minded and relationship-based, empowering team members. They are asking for and accept help. Certainly, as this case demonstrates, organizational culture is an important consideration for an effective leadership transition and organizational

188    Terry Fernsler sustainability. Effective leaders learn and adapt to their environments so they can exercise influence. If a different leadership style or an organizational change is desired, planning can facilitate bringing team members along (Tebbe, 2008). Organizational culture will not change simply by appointing a leader with a different style.

Conclusion The Founding Executive Director of a nonprofit is in an enviable position of establishing organizational culture. Miriam’s professional style instilled a servant leadership model that stakeholders readily accepted. The model included them as valued participants in raising support for a treasured community organization. Miriam’s replacement upon her retirement had a different leadership style. New leaders can sometimes successfully change the organizational culture to fit their style, but they must begin from within the existing culture, plan, and reflect (Schein, 2017). Graham was not comfortable with a shared or participatory leadership style and was not interested in reflection, only in giving direction. Nonprofit organizations have multiple stakeholders who have varying degrees of influence. Relationships in such mission-driven organizations are more important than authority. This is why an aphorism, inaccurately attributed to the late management expert Peter Drucker, is widely used in nonprofit organizations: culture eats structure for breakfast, not even waiting for lunch. In multistakeholder organizations, if culture changes it does so gradually. Leaders must recognize this and be very flexible. When a dramatic change is desired, communication must be transparent and honest. Replacing or retraining team members who have institutional knowledge and the ability to nurture relationships will be time consuming and costly. This means learning to understand oneself and the team members, being aware of one’s emotional intelligence, and learning what motivates different team members. Most team members seek fulfillment through work (McGregor, 1960). Graham was not used to operating outside his comfort zone, and saw anyone who questioned his methods as a rival. It resulted in the need for emotional healing in the organization, distracting it from a focus on results.

References Beck, T. E., Lengnick-Hall, C. A., & Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (2008). Solutions out of context: Examining the transfer of business concepts to nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 19(2), 153–171. Fischer, R. L., Wilsker, A., & Young, D. R. (2011). Exploring the revenue mix of nonprofit organizations: Does it relate to publicness? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(4), 662–681. Gabriel, Y. (2011). Psychoanalytic approaches to leadership. In A. Bryman (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of leadership (pp. 393–405). London: Sage. Greenfield, J. M. (2011). Budgeting for fundraising and evaluating performance. In E. R. Tempel, T. L. Seiler, & E. E. Aldrich (Eds.), Achieving excellence in fundraising (p. 353). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Incompetent Authoritarian Replaces a Servant Leader    189 Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Westfield, IN: The Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership. Hurley, R., & Ryman, J. (2003). Making the transition from micromanager to leader. Fordham University, 113, 2–9. Janis, I. L. (1971). Groupthink. Psychology Today, 5(6), 43–46. McGregor, D. (1960). Theory X and theory Y. Organization theory. 358, 374. McKnight, J., & Block, P. (2010). The abundant community: Awakening the power of families and neighborhoods. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Northouse, P. P. (2018). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practices. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 5). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Schon, D. A. (1986). Leadership as reflection-in-action. In T. J. Sergiovani & J. E. Corbally (Eds.), Leadership and organizational culture: New perspectives on administrative theory and practice (pp. 36–63). Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. Spears, L. C. (2002) Tracing the past, present, and future of servant leadership. In L. C. Spears & M. Lawrence (Eds.), Focus on leadership: Servant-leadership for the 21st century (pp. 1–16). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Tebbe, D. (2008). Chief executive transitions: How to hire and support a nonprofit CEO. Washington, DC: BoardSource. White, R., & Lippitt, R. (1968). Leader behavior and member reaction in three “social climates.” In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory. (pp. 318-323). New York: Harper & Rowe. Wong, P. T., & Page, D. (2003, August). Servant leadership: An opponent-process model and the revised servant leadership profile. In Proceedings of the servant leadership research roundtable (pp. 1–11). Retrieved from: https://www.meaning.ca/archives/ archive/pdfs/WongServantLeadership.pdf

This page intentionally left blank

Appendix: Interview Protocol – Toxic Leadership Study For the questions that follow, you may consider your current manager or a past manager. Question 1: Think of your expectations and feelings when you first started working on that person. How much of yourself were you willing to bring to work? Try to recall your feelings and experiences during that time. Question 2: Over time, how did your manager’s behaviors either sustain or hinder your willingness to “bring your whole self ” to work? In general, think of examples of “engaging” and “disengaging” behaviors. Question 3: Next, we will review some components of “toxic leadership” (Schmidt, 2014). We will explore the impact of toxic and non-toxic behaviors on your own experiences at work. For each question, think of the impact of the manager’s behaviors (toxic or non-toxic) on you and your engagement. Question 3a. Did your manager ever engage in self-promotion? If so, please explain what he/she did. Please be specific (use examples). If not, please explain how the manager refrained from promoting self. What impact did the manager’s behaviors have on you and your engagement at work? Question 3b. Did your manager ever engage in abusive behaviors? If so, please explain what he/she did. Once again, please be specific. If not, please explain how the manager dealt with situations in which he or she did not agree with something that was done (e.g., when he/she was frustrated with the results of a project or when someone made a mistake). What impact did the manager’s behaviors have on you and your engagement at work? Question 3c. How well did your manager control his or her emotions? Please provide examples in which the person either controlled his/her emotions well or did not. What impact did the manager’s behaviors have on you and your engagement at work? Question 3d. Did your manager ever exhibit narcissistic behaviors? Examples of narcissistic behaviors at work include showing a sense of entitlement and demonstrating through verbal or non-verbal behaviors that the person thinks he/she is “better” than others. If not, please explain how the manager demonstrated through verbal or non-verbal communication or actions that everyone was worthy and that he/she was no better than anyone else. What impact did the manager’s behaviors have on you and your engagement at work? Question 3e. Did your manager exhibit authoritarian behaviors? Examples of authoritarian behaviors include inflexibility in decision-making, trying to make all decisions (regardless of their importance) and excessive control of the employees’ work. If not, please explain how the manager refrained from exercising unreasonable control. What impact did the manager’s behaviors have on you and your engagement at work?

192    Appendix: Interview Protocol – Toxic Leadership Study Question 4: Is there any question I should have asked that I did not ask? Anything else you would like to share? Question 5: Would you like to see a transcript of our interview? If so, where should I send the transcript? Question 6: Would you like to see the results of our study? If so, where should I send the results?

Reference Schmidt, A. (2014). An examination of toxic leadership, job outcomes, and the impact of military deployment [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Maryland]. DRUM. Retrieved from http://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/15250

Index Accountability, 122, 129, 135, 163 individual, 163 manager, 77 Actions, 162 Adaptive selling behavior, 82, 84, 86 “Alpha-male wins all” culture, 169 Ambition, 94–95, 170 Appreciative inquiry, 25–26 Arrogance, 2, 19, 133, 172, 174–175 level of, 170 organizational, 174 Authentic and unique expression, 34 Authentic leadership, 65, 81, 176 Authoritarian leadership, 94, 186–187 servant leadership to, 183–185 Authoritative leadership, 50, 55 Authoritative micro-management, 50, 52 Autocratic leadership (see also Crisis leadership) adaptive selling behavior, 86 group level, 88 individual level, 87 leadership failure factor, 82–85 leadership lesson, 88 organization level, 88 SOCO, 85–86 unethical selling, 86–87 Availability, 5–6 “Before and After” theme, 7–9 Board of Directors, 56, 114–115, 118, 128–130, 132–135, 181–182, 185 C.A.R.E paradigm, 30 Causal attribution, 72, 74, 77 Certified public accountant (CPA), 182

Change management, 148–149 Charismatic leadership, 132–133 Chiefs of party, 101 Collapse, 169, 171–172 Combative corporate culture, 169–170 Communication breakdowns, 32–33 Conducive environment, 121–122 Conflict escalation, 162–163 Conflict styles of executive team, 163 Confrontation, 161 Contracting officer representative, 92–101 Corporate lifecycle, 175 Courage, 22, 24, 101, 163, 176 Crises, 59 aftermath, 62–63 contextual background, 60 incidents, 60–62 leadership lessons, 63–67 Crisis leadership assessment, 65 evaluation, 66 failures in, 59 and management, 60 Cultivation, 35 Customer orientation, 83, 85–89 Customer-oriented behavior, 82, 84–85 Debates and Polemics, 162 Decisions, 13, 54–56, 59, 63–65, 148–149, 151, 170–171 evidence-based, 93 strategic, 140 Define, discover, dream, design, and deliver (five D’s), 26 Destructive leader(ship), 114, 119–120 Development Director, 129–131

194    Index Disillusionment, 170–171 Diversity taskforce, 36 Dysfunctional leadership, 50 Effective leadership, 21, 24, 55, 91–92, 148, 164, 187 Emotional intelligence (EI), 18–20, 92, 97, 173 Emotional task, 99 Empathy, 19, 97, 114, 173, 186 Employee engagement, 1, 4–6, 14, 141 Employees, 5–6, 9, 11–13, 75–76, 113–115, 118, 120, 122, 124 Engagement, 4–6 community, 180 employee, 1, 4–6, 14, 141 personal engagement opportunities, 34 Entrepreneurial founders, 172, 175 Erosion of psychological safety, 105–106 Ethical leadership, 47, 64, 72 employees, 75–76 groups and teams, 77 managers, 76–77 organizations, 77–78 performance appraisal, 75–78 Ethical responsibility, 53 Executive Director, 50–53, 55–56, 62, 128–129, 132, 179–180, 183 Faith component, 118–122 Faith-based nonprofit, 114, 120, 124 First impression, 72, 75, 77, 133, 154 Followers, 4–5, 9, 13–14, 20, 24, 46–47, 54–55, 65–66, 110, 116, 119, 164, 186 Followership, 1, 47 Founder, 20, 134, 136, 175, 180, 186 authority, 136 succession, 170–171 Founder’s syndrome, 128 lessons, 132–135 organization, 128–129 organizational growth, 129–132

Fragmentation of The Enemy, 163 Freshness, 74 Funding for professional leadership growth opportunities, 36 Fundraising model, 131 Future-proofing, 140, 143 Governance Committee, 115 Group lessons, 123–124, 163 Groups, 77, 109, 186 Growth, 170 Habitat for Humanity International, 128–129 Habits of unsuccessful leaders, 172–176 Hardening, 162 Head of Products, 161–163 Humane management, 144 Images and Coalitions, 162 Individual lessons, 124, 161–163 Initiation, 35 Intellectual growth, provide opportunities for, 33–34 Intergroup dynamics, 5 Interpersonal relationships, 5 Intrinsic motivation, 142, 144 Knowledge of self, 20–21 Laissez-faire approach, 180 Leader Member Exchange theory (LMX), 24, 65–66 Leader(s), 13, 20, 123, 186, 188 deconstructing with theory, 19–26 efforts, 5 invest in building organizational coalitions, 25–26 invest in others and understand systems, 21–25 invest in self knowledge, 18 manipulation, 45–46 Leadership, 4, 148 authoritative leadership, 55

Index    195 challenge and failure, 94–96 combining transformational and situational leadership styles, 54–55 ethical responsibility, 53 failure factor, 82–85 failures in, 160–161 lessons, 13, 108–110, 172–176, 185–188 micro-management, 55–56 organizational culture, 54 personal lesson in, 52 shadows, 92, 97 Leading by example, 164 Leading oneself, 92 deconstruction of experience and leadership lessons, 96–101 group level, 98–99 individual level, 96–98 key individuals, 94 leadership challenge and failure, 94–96 organization level, 99–101 Learning organization, 144 Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col), 104–110 Limited Destructive Blows, 162 Loss of Face, 162 Management, 5–6 micro-management, 55 performance appraisal, 75 professional, 175 relationship, 19 self-management, 19 Managers, 4–5, 13, 42, 72, 76–78, 85, 87, 172 department, 52 micro-managers, 55 mid-level, 50–51 Manipulative mentors, 33 Marketing, 161–163 corporate, 44 manager, 32 quarterly marketing campaigns, 42 strategy, 82

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y, 143–144 Meaningful tasks, 5 Medium College USA, 73 Mentoring, 30, 33, 35 Amanda Ticker story, 31–32 communication breakdowns, 32–33 Imonee Brinkley story, 30–31 recommendations for groups, 35–36 recommendations for organizations, 33–35 Micro-management, 51, 55–56 Millennials, 30, 33–36 Mistakes, performance appraisal, 72–75 Motivation, 5, 10, 47, 54, 56, 82, 97 intrinsic over extrinsic, 141 lack of, 155 of team members, 186 Multi-dimensional wellness, 20 Multi-tier feedback from company leaders, 36 Narcissism, 2, 4, 114, 119, 124 Narcissist leader (NL), 114 analysis of toxic triangle and faith component, 118–122 lessons learning, 122–124 recruitment issues, 114–115 trajectory of Devon’s governance, 115–118 Narcissists, 114, 119, 122–124 Next generation leaders, 36 Nightmare theme, 9–11 Non-profit organizations, 53–54 Nonprofit Boards of directors, 135 Nonprofit stakeholders, 135, 187 Objectivism, lack of, 73 Organizational arrogance, 174 Organizational culture, 54, 66–67, 87, 147–148, 152, 180 Organizational failure, unhealthy values and behaviors lead to, 173–174

196    Index Organizational growth, 75, 129–132 Organizational leaders, 59, 64, 66–67, 111 Organizational lessons, 122–123, 163–164 Organizational norms, 5–6 Organizational politics, 21, 23–24, 152 Organizational psychology, 144 Organizational silence, 114, 116, 122, 124 Organizations, 1, 13, 77–78, 128–129 engaged, 4 learning, 144 needle, 34 nonprofit, 53–54, 134 recommendations for, 33–35

Redefinition, 35 Region-Wide Team (RWT), 116–117, 120–121 Relational aggression, 21, 23–24 Relational leadership, 21, 24–25 Religious organizations, 114 Research & development group (R&D group), 140–141 inflection point, 142–143 interpretation and implications, 143–144 story, 140–144 Resignation, 52, 62, 118, 171–172 Risk-taking, 171–175 Road-Trip, 171–172 Runaround theme, 12

Peer mentors, 35 Pennsylvania State University (Penn State University), 60 Performance appraisal, 71–72 ethical leadership, 75–78 Medium College USA, 73 mistakes, 72–75 Small College USA, 72 Personal engagement opportunities, 34 Personal growth, 33 Personal leadership lesson, 26 Pharmaceutical industry, 81–82, 84–85 Political action committee (PAC), 176 Pretender theme, 11–12 Product managers (PMs), 41–42 Professional Development (PD), 35, 117, 153 Program manager, 93–96, 98–100 Protégé, 31–35 Psychological maturity, 121 Psychological safety aftermath, 108 devastation, 107–108 early months, 104–106 erosion of, 105–106 leadership lessons, 108–110 Psychosocial process, 151

Safety, 5 experiencing, 5 psychological, 104–109 Salespersons, 83, 85–88 Search Committee, 115, 123, 150, 154 Self-awareness, 13, 65, 97 lack of, 19 leadership learning lessons, 18 Self-betrayal, 1, 92, 98 Self-esteem needs, 121 Self-regulation, 92, 97–98 Selling Orientation–Customer Orientation (SOCO), 85–86 Selling-oriented behavior, 82, 83–84 Senior Student Affairs Officer (SSAO), 148–154 Separation, 35 Servant leadership, 180 (see also Ethical leadership) to authoritarian leadership, 183–185 failures in leadership, 160–161 group lessons, 163 individual lessons, 161–163 leadership lessons, 185–188 Miriam, 180–183 organizational lessons, 163–164 story, 157–160

Index    197 Shared leadership, 148, 187 Situational leadership styles, 54–55 Small College USA, 72 Social skills, 97 Stakeholders, 26, 36, 129, 135 external and internal, 25–26 nonprofit, 135, 187 Strategies of Threats, 162 Succession, 134, 170, 173, 175 Supervision, 114, 148, 151 Supervisors, 1, 75–76, 151–152 Susceptible followers, 120–121 Systems, 13, 23, 175 Team leadership, 147, 149 experiences, 152–153 individuals, 151–152 organization, 153–154 timeline, 149–151 Teams, 12, 21, 34, 75, 77, 181 “Theory X” of management, 143–144 “Theory Y” of management, 143–144 Together Into The Abyss, 163 Toxic followership, 47 big reveal, 44 challenge, 42–43 followers, 46 leader manipulation, 45–46 presentation day, 43–44 truth, 44–45 Toxic leaders, 4–6, 13

Toxic leadership, 4–5, 47, 105–107, 110 data analysis, 7 leadership lessons, 13 participant selection, 6 results, 7–12 subjectivities, 6–7 themes, 8 Toxic moments, 13 Toxic triangle, 114 analysis of, 118–122 Transformational leadership styles, 54–55 Transparency, 86, 135 Trust, 20, 23–24, 37, 45–46, 84, 87, 117, 148 Unethical selling behavior, 82, 84, 86–87 United States (US), 92 agency, 93, 100 projects, 92 Voluntarism, 131–132 Wellness, 18–21 When Leadership Fails, 1–2 Work-life balance, 34–35 Workplace, 46, 168–169 bullying, 174–175 experiences, 1