There are two sides to leadership: the constructive side and the destructive side. Both are evident in organizations, but only one seems to get all the attention.
Implicit in contemporary approaches to leadership, particularly the leadership of change, is the assumption that leaders are a constructive force that have a positive impact on organization and employee performance. As a result, the overwhelming emphasis in leadership research and development is on the factors associated with effective, successful, or constructive leadership. The implication in these approaches is that ineffective leadership is simply the absence of the factors associated with effective leadership. But this is an inaccurate and incomplete view of leadership.
Under such terms as “abusive supervisors”, “petty tyrants”, “bad leadership”, “toxic leaders”, “intolerable bosses”, “derailed leaders”, and “brutal bosses“, researchers have investigated the “dark side” of leadership (Conger, 1990) and have found that leaders can and do take actions and engage in behaviors that are destructive to the organization and/or the people who work in them. This research indicates that that destructive leadership includes behaviors that go beyond simply the absence of effective leadership behaviors to include such actions as arbitrariness, belittling of others, lack of consideration, and a forcing style of conflict resolution. Among the impacts of destructive leadership are such negative outcomes as reduced employee commitment and satisfaction, revenge and retaliation, lower performance and work unit cohesiveness, and high frustration, stress, reactance, and helplessness among subordinates.
Interestingly, some researchers propose it is possible for the same leaders to be constructive in one setting or situation and destructive in another (Einarsen, Aasland, & Skogstad, 2007). In my research on the leadership of change, it is apparent that leaders who are typically constructive can, during a change, engage in actions that are destructive to the change, the people implementing the change, and even to themselves. Among the results of such actions are the loss of leader credibility and increased resentment, cynicism, and resistance to change by those implementing the change. Ironically, the resistance to change leaders complain about may well be the product of their own destructive actions.
To fully understand leadership, particularly the leadership of change, requires we consider both sides of leadership and how they impact each other. Idiosyncratic credit theory suggests that typically constructive leaders are likely to be forgiven for “destructive mistakes” that damage trust, particularly if they use closure conversations to acknowledge and apologize for the mistakes. However, there may be a limit to how many destructive actions a constructive leader can take before it begins undermining their leadership.
Some References:
Conger, J. A. 1990. The dark side of leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 19(2): 44-55.
Einarsen, S., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstad, A. 2007. Destructive leadership behaviour: A definition and conceptual model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18: 207-216.
Lombardo, M. M., & McCall, M. W. J. 1984. Coping with an intolerable boss. Greensboro, N.C.: Center for Creative Leadership.
McCall, M. W. J., & Lombardo, M. M. 1983. Off the track: Why and how successful executives get derailed. Greensboro, N.C.: Center for Creative Leadership.
