When an individual is extremely and inordinately interested with oneself, it is referred to as narcissism. Narcissistic persons are also egocentric and self cantered in nature. Narcissism is associated with a high level of smugness. It does matter how much theory is offered about what is good management and leadership. This essay argues that all organizations will have managers in power that are narcissistic and incompetent.
Leadership traits associated with narcissistic behaviour illuminates a number of undesirable characteristics (Duchon & Drake, 2009). First, it is crucial to mention that narcissistic leaders often presume that everything should revolve around them. In other words, they do not count other people to be better than them. They are quite often blinded by their mean desires and as such, they overly lose sensitivity towards the needs of other people. It is unfortunate to note that a large number of narcissistic leaders are produced even by well established organizations owing to the prevalence of hedonistic culture which is also consumer-driven. It is surprising to learn that every person has some traces of narcissism to manage on a regular basis.
Second, leadership narcissism can be demonstrated when leaders prefer being served all the time without reciprocating. Effective leaders are supposed to serve and give direction whenever need arises. The merit or work output of a narcissistic leader is usually below the expected standards.
Narcissistic leaders can hardly take criticisms lightly. Any form of harsh criticism is injurious to narcissistic leaders bearing in mind that they usually rate themselves better than others. Dissenting opinions and slights can hardly be tolerated by narcissistic leaders. In addition, the subordinates should not be given due attention according to narcissistic leaders because they have nothing good to contribute towards organisational development (Hamedoglu & Potas, 2012).
Inability to listen is a common characteristic of narcissistic leaders. Although leaders who fall into this category are often good orators with exemplary verbal skills, they can hardly listen and take note on the opinions of other people. Narcissistic tendencies in organizations are common even though such behaviours are destructive in the growth and development of both employees and an organization. Needless to say, organisational functioning cannot be incidental to executive narcissism contrary to myriads of leadership theoretical models that have been developed in the past. Perhaps, we may argue that organisational researchers have a heinous task ahead of relating theory and practical significance of effective leadership in organizations (Brown & Treviño, 2014).
Substantive organisational outcomes are negatively affected by executive narcissism. For instance, some of the top management managements might be compelled to align their performance with the narrow wishes of a top chief executive officer (Rijsenbilt & Commandeur, 2013). As much as the individual members in a management team is capable of injecting new ideas, a narcissistic leader can allow any level of independence to flourish at workplace. When it comes to staffing, structure and management strategies in organizations, narcissistic leaders can overwhelmingly impede performance outcomes since they do not value the input of other managers.
The damaging effects of narcissistic CEOs were once established by Don Hambrick (Michel & Bowling, 2013). He was a leadership expert at the Business School of Columbia. In the study, Hambrick observed that narcissistic leaders can grossly impact their organizations to a point of facing them out of the market. The study encountered one major challenge: it was cumbersome to approach chief executive officers who were likely to be narcissists and be requested to fill the personality questionnaires. In fact, most personality and leadership studies conducted in the past usually fail to meet this threshold thereby culminating their findings into theoretical models.
Between 1992 and 2004, Hambrick completed the first practical study in the computer and software industry. A total of 111 participants took part in the study. These participants were indeed chief executive officers from various organizations within the industry. In order to conclude the findings, an index for narcissism among the chief executive officers was complied as follows:
- The application of first person singular pronouns by chief executive officers when addressing important organisational meetings.
- The difference between the first and second highest paid chief executive officers within the same organization.
- The number of times a chief executive officer is mentioned in press releases of an organization.
- The photo size of the chief executive officer in the yearly company reports.
From the study, it was evident that narcissistic chief executive officers tend to seek more credit facilities, ran more costs, spend more on research and development as well as spent more on advertising. These limits were measured in relation to their sales ratio. Leaders who are narcissistic also spend more on premiums and carry out surplus acquisitions. The findings also revealed that big performance fluctuations are common with organizations that are led by narcissistic leaders.
The contemporary leadership model illustrates three levels that ensure effective leadership and management in organizations. Although the new model asserts that it can improve a person’s leadership presence, it is only a theoretical model that summarizes ideal situations that cannot be accomplished in real life situations. For instance, the model posits that leaders should pursue to grow themselves as leaders both psychologically and technically. While this is a noble call for all organisational leaders who seek to be effective at workplace, individual personality differences may act against the desired outcomes. How would narcissistic leader carry out self-appraisal and improve his/her leadership competences?
Worse still, the new leadership model duplicates some sections of the conventional leadership theories that have been impractical for several decades. A case in point is the Traits Theory of leadership. The qualities of leadership proposed by this theory have never been unanimously accepted by scholars of organisational behaviour. The classification adopted by the Traits Theory of leadership has been defied far and wide owing to lack of pragmatism. In addition, leaders are born according to this theory (Godkin & Allcorn, 2009). This implies that leaders should be exclusively selected. It rules out the possibility of nurturing or developing leaders. If this is the case, why do we have capacity building and training for leaders who aspire to take executive positions in organizations? Why are specific academic qualifications preferred for individuals who apply for jobs in various leadership positions? These are terse and salient questions that the Traits Theory cannot explain.
The situational/contingency theories of leadership argue that various situations or circumstances can compel organisational leaders to change their behaviours. However, behavioral change among leaders is not practically possible in several instances. Leadership seminars and workshops can rarely change ingrained habits, fears, or unconscious fixed beliefs of individuals. In any case, it has proven to be practically cumbersome for perceived narcissistic leaders to flex their behaviours and aptly apply these theories (Belasen & Frank, 2008).
It is apparent that narcissistic and incompetent leaders are inevitable in organizations. Regardless of the leadership efforts being put in place, organizations will always suffer from this crop of leadership. Hence, organizations should employ competitive recruitment and selection process when hiring leaders and managers. Organizations should also strive to assess leaders’ behaviour by carrying out regular performance management appraisals and reviews using psychometric tests and other tools.
References
Belasen, A. & Frank, N. 2008, “Competing values leadership: quadrant roles and personality traits”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 127-143.
Brown, M.E. & Treviño, L., K. 2014, “Do Role Models Matter? An Investigation of Role Modeling as an Antecedent of Perceived Ethical Leadership”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 122, no. 4, pp. 587-598.
Duchon, D. & Drake, B. 2009, “Organizational Narcissism and Virtuous Behavior”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 301-308.
Godkin, L. & Allcorn, S. 2009, “Institutional narcissism, arrogant organization disorder and interruptions in organizational learning”, The Learning Organization, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 40-57.
Hamedoglu, M.A. & Potas, N. 2012, “Organizational Narcissism Scale (ONS)”, Engineering Management Research, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 53-65.
Michel, J.S. & Bowling, N.A. 2013, “Does Dispositional Aggression Feed the Narcissistic Response? The Role of Narcissism and Aggression in the Prediction of Job Attitudes and Counterproductive Work Behaviors”, Journal of Business and Psychology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 93-105.
Rijsenbilt, A. & Commandeur, H. 2013, “Narcissus Enters the Courtroom: CEO Narcissism and Fraud”, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 117, no. 2, pp. 413-429.