Are You a Leader Displaying Dark Triad Behaviours?

It goes without saying that today’s top business teams are facing increasing and immense pressures -demanding stakeholder expectations, complex decision-making, and a need to balance competing burdens can result in some executives exhibiting negative behaviours.

There is a misplaced perception that many leaders naturally possesses ‘dark triad’ traits in the form of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy, all commonly associated characteristics of toxic leadership that can also be interpreted as the result of living through protracted stress-induced circumstances.

How such leaders are ultimately viewed and labelled can go on to significantly impact workplace dynamics and morale.

The growing pressures facing leaders

It’s fair to view stress is being part and parcel of leadership for those who are directly responsible and accountable for the survival and sustainable success of the organisation through their management of teams, making critical decisions, and meeting organisational objectives, often with limited resources and limited-notice constraints.

Some, observing such behaviours, look for explanation based on the leader’s personality, reputation and other imagined inclinations. People more tend to attribute others’ behaviours to their inherent character, rather than any external circumstances.

As a consequence, actions under pressure are often interpreted as evidence of the dark triad at work. But what exactly are these characteristics and how do they play out when examined in the cold light of day?

1. Machiavellianism

This label is used to characterise actions viewed as manipulation, deceit and self-interest. Machiavellianism is a common accusation thrown at board directors, C-Suite members, but also general managers, (GMs).

Placed under pressure, these groups can exhibit behaviours which appear to peers and subordinates as manipulative. In reality, senior management may be attempting to control the pernicious effect of damaging circumstances to the best of their ability.

Strategic decision making often requires determining a clear path forward to navigate through misalignments, and equally protect the leader’s position. Observers can all too readily conclude the individual is simply self-serving. 

In more reflective moments, our ongoing Kakabadse research has frequently found directors admit that such behaviours are more reactive strategies on their part, offering the ‘best way to cope’ with the demands and expectations placed on them.

• Narcissism

Narcissism is an inflated sense of self-importance, coupled with the need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. This is a mindset often perceived for C-Suite and especially GMs under pressure. 

GMs, divisional heads, or subsidiary managing directors (MDs) are the level of management caught between the C-Suite and operational management below. They are effectively sandwiched between a rock and a hard place.

Under pressure, especially when tasked with achieving targets they feel are plain impossible, GMs can over-assert their authority. The alternative reaction is micromanagement, a reluctance for tasks to be delegated, or a tendency to take credit for other’s achievements.

Equally, GMs who are overwhelmed by pressure are as likely to withdraw emotionally. Their focus resorts to tasks at hand, rather than with sensitively engaging with teams, peers and superiors.

Detachment is naturally interpreted as having a lack of empathy, reinforcing any belief that the person is more concerned with their own success than the wellbeing of employees. It should be noted that emotional distancing is a coping mechanism used by many of us to protect ourselves from further damaging strain.

• Psychopathy

Impulsivity, ruthlessness and a glaring lack of empathy are all hallmarks of psychopathy. Board directors, C-Suite members, GMs and operational managers under significant pressure do exhibit behaviours that peers, subordinates and even their bosses can perceive as cold and uncaring.

This is particularly true if tough decisions are being made that have a negative impact on the team.

Leaders out of necessity prioritise results over people, and managers at various levels are forced to make difficult choices under pressure involving redundancy, budget cuts and the restructuring of teams.

These actions, while often necessary for the organisation’s survival, are lived through as being ruthless and lacking compassion. A leader who makes decisions without consulting the team, or who appears unconcerned about emotional impacts on employees, is often labelled psychopathic.

And yet, what they are doing might be a necessary evil, especially in high-stress circumstances.

Being seen as cold-hearted or indifferent, even psychopathic, is relatively commonplace. A growing body of literature refers to the ‘psychopathic CEO,’ but offers little evidence to justify the label.

Mitigating dark triad perceptions

Labelling those leaders displaying dark triad behaviours has severe consequences. An inevitable deterioration of relationships requires immediate attention as negative interactions can rapidly spiral out of control.

Irrespective of the challenges faced, the board, directors, C-Suite members and GMs should consider the four following strategies of mitigation:

1. Re-establish engagement: Despite the continuing damage of being branded with dark triad behaviours, re-engaging with the most critical stakeholders is a priority. Consider who these are and who needs to be onside is the first step.

Be honest about why negativities happened in the first place, and clear about why mistrust exists. This provides an opportunity to discuss the nature of pressures being faced.

Emergent discussions help stakeholders understand and come to terms with the stress-induced behaviours and differentiate these from malicious intent or toxic character elements.

• Reconsider Alignment: Don’t aim too high. Just get people talking openly.

For improvements to take place, rudimentary engagement needs to take hold and align divergent interests. The confidence to admit how and which interests have veered off course or been damaged is now possible.

Two key conversations are needed on trust-building and alignment, and the more in-depth the discourse is, the greater the resulting trust.

Conversations should be sensitively handled and, most of all, discussions must be realistic as to what can be achieved on a step-by-step basis.

• Repositioning Credibility: Whether the credibility the directors and GMs once enjoyed will ever be re-established is open to question. Irrespective of this, the leader still has to establish some level of trustworthiness.

The more factual and evidence-based discussions are on engagement and alignment, the more the credibility of the director will increase.

Creditability needs to be sufficient-enough for a workable trust to emerge among the stakeholders. A strategy of continued, small improvements is the way forward.

• If all else fails, leave: The time taken experiencing such animosity is a key consideration. Despite all efforts the situation may be beyond repair.

Once this becomes evident, it is time for the individual, irrespective of whether they have been judged fairly or not, to leave. To continue attempting to repair relationships when no such opportunity exists only serves to exacerbates the unpleasantness.

A label that sticks

Harmful labelling is a fact of life for those in positions of authority or with a high profile.

Even the most positive and well-intended directors and managers are stretched at times through no fault of their own.

Being blamed for unfavourable developments is a fundamental aspect of leadership. If the individual can find the resilience needed to face-up to, and work through tensions, they have a chance at overcoming such adversity.

Being accused of displaying dark triad behaviours is integral to leadership, so it is crucial to find ways through this challenge.

Leaders are the last port of call for concerns that others cannot address. No matter how they end up being labelled, shouldering a ‘the buck stops here’ mantra is what earns the most respect.