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

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 diversity-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 wellbeing.” 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-jerrysandusky-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-ba83- a7a396e6b2a7_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,