When Leadership Fails Individual, Group and Organizational Lessons from the Worst Workplace Experiences (Lonnie R. Morris, Jr., Wendy M. Edmonds) (z-lib.org) (1)

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, professor, 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 xi About the Editors xiii About the Contributors 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. Sample Demographics: Gender. 7 Table 1b. Sample Demographics: Age. 7 Table 2. Toxic Leadership Themes. 8 Table 3. Roles of Key Individuals Involved in Project Implementation. 94 Table 4. Reasonable Cost Guidelines for Solicitation Activities. 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 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). Table 1a. Sample Demographics: Gender. Gender Males Females Preferred Not to Answer 5 5 3 Table 1b. Sample Demographics: Age. Age Meana SD 39.5 12.91 a The average age was based on 11 out of 13 participants. Two participants preferred not to report their age.

8 Ngozi Igbokwe et al. 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 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.

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 witnessed 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 problem] 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-goodmanagers-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/businessjournal/ 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, selfawareness, 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