By Teresa A. Daniel, JD, PhD and Gary S. Metcalf, PhD
As scholar-practitioners, this question has consumed our research agenda for the past several years. In an attempt to find answers, we have completed studies both in the corporate sector [i] and in a military environment (in this case, the U.S. Army). [ii] But what is it that toxic leaders do and why, you might be asking, should anyone care? Isn’t this just the newest buzzword in a long line of “hot” topics?
Toxic Leaders—Who They Are and What They Do
Whether they are labeled as toxic leaders (in a military context) or workplace bullies (in a corporate environment), they are highly destructive. These types of leaders act aggressively toward their subordinates, are highly critical and dismissive, demand almost blind loyalty, frequently blame or take credit for the work of others and play mind games designed to keep people off balance. They exert their dominance and exploit their power and authority by threatening, intimidating, yelling, or engaging in vicious and explosive verbal assaults intended to demean, undermine, and publicly humiliate those on the receiving end. Though rare, they also sometimes engage in physical attacks too. Their subordinates generally hate or fear them (often both), and usually work very hard to stay out of their line of sight.
Why Should You Care?
Toxic leaders can (and often do) achieve extraordinary results, but the price is often sky high. Their impact on people is destructive and often intolerable, but they don’t seem to care. They just want to get the job done as fast as humanly possible so that they can secure their next promotion and move on up. As a result of their short-term “take no prisoners” focus, they invariably leave their organizations in far worse shape than when they started. Outcomes range from mutiny and death to an erosion of trust, increased turnover, domestic violence, higher absenteeism, increased alcohol and drug use, as well as reductions in employee motivation, productivity, and job satisfaction. As if that were not enough, the organization is also often hit with related costs arising from increases in workers’ compensation claims, plus marked spikes in both mental health and medical expenses (predominantly due to increased stress). In combination, these likely outcomes seem like more than enough reason to want to do something about finding, fixing, or firing these destructive leaders. There are some interesting distinctions between destructive leaders who operate in a military context from those operating in the corporate world. We will explore these differences next.
The Toxic Military Leader: “It’s All About Me”
According to a recent U.S. Army internal survey, an estimated 20% of soldiers report having suffered under a toxic leader [iii]. So what does it mean to be toxic? The term is generally applied to a leader who “appears driven by self-centered careerism at the expense of their subordinates and unit, and whose style is characterized by abusive and dictatorial behavior that promotes an unhealthy organizational climate” [iv]. Similarly, others have characterized toxic leadership as “an apparent lack of concern for the well-being of subordinates”, “a personality or interpersonal technique that negatively affects organizational climate”, and “a conviction by subordinates that the leader is motivated primarily by self-interest”. [v]
Supported by a strong culture that considers mission accomplishment to be almost sacrosanct, toxic military leaders are intensely mission focused which, of course, is entirely appropriate. It becomes a double-edged sword, though, when they fail to take into account how the results are attained. They tend to adopt a “results at any cost” strategy that does not factor in how working a rigorous and demanding work schedule (often including weekends) impacts soldiers and their families.
The impact on people is similarly harsh when a toxic leader ambitiously over-extends the unit on projects to enhance their own standing in their commander’s perspective. In these situations, soldiers are often required to work for extended periods of time without adequate personnel or equipment on the off-chance that the toxic leader will get some extra benefit from his superiors by taking on the assignment. Consequently, the subordinates of toxic leaders feel that toxic leaders have no empathy for and simply do not care about them. The result is that they either burn out and leave due to the relentless demands and harsh treatment, or stay but feel angry and demoralized— not exactly the conditions to inspire or build a cohesive work unit.
Not only are toxic leaders results-driven to a fault, but they wholeheartedly embrace a “kiss up and kick down” style of operating. Their advanced interpersonal skills allow them to schmooze and get along with senior leaders at the top echelon. This political saavy, coupled with their accomplishment of near-impossible missions, causes their superiors to hold them with high regard—viewing them as “great guys” with “extraordinary abilities to get things done”. Their solid reputation for being bright, personable, technically competent, and for getting things done overwhelms any suspicion by their boss that their means might not justify the ends. [vi]
While toxic leaders are often revered by their superiors, their subordinates know all too well how abusive and excessively self-interested they can be. They are widely viewed as having little regard for people other than themselves. They are also perceived as being obsessively focused not on doing what is necessarily right for the U.S. Army, but laser-focused on securing their next promotion or opportunity to impress their superiors. In fact, they sometimes get involved in activities only if they believe that a senior leader will be there to impress. This self-absorption causes subordinates to see the motive of their leader as being less about ensuring the Army’s success, and more along the lines of “it’s all about me, me, and me”. Not surprisingly, toxic leaders do not tend to see themselves as arrogant, self-interested, destructive, or cruel. If they are aware at all of their impact on others, they rationalize their behavior as being “tough” and “mission driven” while denigrating those who object to their operating style by calling them “whiners” and “crybabies”.
The truth is their behavior is both tough and mission driven; however, it goes far beyond that—their interactions with subordinates are widely perceived as harsh, abusive, intimidating, threatening, humiliating, and almost always demoralizing to those who work for them. For the rare toxic leaders who are actually aware of their negative impact on others, they don’t seem to care as long as the mission is accomplished. The result is an excessive number of transfer requests or full resignations from the Army by soldiers under their command.
It is the failure of toxic leaders to develop and retain the talented subordinates that are so critical to the success of an all-volunteer Army that may be their most lasting and destructive impact on the organization. [vii] Think about it: when a person works for a corporation, they can quit and go to work for another company but stay in their profession. However, when military personnel find their leaders to be so intolerable that they would prefer to leave the service, all they can do is resign and leave the military profession altogether, along with their pension. [viii] Dave Matsuda nailed it when he said this: Outside the wire, the enemy is the enemy; inside the wire, the command climate is the enemy. [ix]
Paradoxically and despite all of the devastation they leave in their wake, toxic leaders are usually successful—at least in the short-term. Why? Because they do get results. But by the time the damage they have caused to their unit is well understood, the toxic leader is long gone, happily promoted and relocated to their next assignment— where they start the destructive cycle all over again.
The Toxic Corporate Leader: “I’m Gonna Get You—Whatever It Takes”
The U.S. Army most assuredly is not the only large organization with a toxic leader problem—the corporate sector also has its fair share of destructive leaders where they are generally referred to as workplace bullies. About 27% of adult Americans reported that they have directly experienced bullying at work defined as “repeated abusive conduct that is threatening, intimidating, humiliating, work sabotage or work abuse.”[x] Like toxic leaders, corporate bullies frequently misuse their power and authority, are excessively self-focused, prone to emotional outbursts, and often treat people unfairly.[xi] But there is one key difference: unlike the toxic military leader whose actions tend to negatively affect the command climate of the entire unit, toxic corporate types typically single out a single employee to torment, humiliate, or intimidate for a period of time—until they move on to their next target. Their motive is described as “I’m gonna get you—whatever it takes”. Some targets describe the experience as being “an all-out personal attack”.[xii] Indeed, our findings support these sentiments by showing that toxic corporate leaders act with malice—meaning “the desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another”[xiii]. What this means is that their behavior is intentionally abusive and purposefully targeted toward specific individuals, usually with the intent to drive the person out of the organization.
Tough Bosses Everywhere: “Tough but Fair”
Although we found some differences between toxic leaders that were dependent on whether they were operating in a military or corporate context, we found that tough bosses are virtually the same in both environments. Think of tough bosses as almost the polar opposite of toxic leaders. While toxic leaders are universally bad for an organization, tough bosses who get things done are essential for success.
The profile of a tough boss most often looks like this: they are professional, self-controlled, highly self-aware, emotionally mature, results-oriented, and strive to make long-term decisions that are good for both their people and the organization. Like toxic leaders, tough bosses are also passionate about getting results; in fact, they are sometimes perceived as nearly maniacal in their efforts to meet their goals. They are by no means “soft” or easy to work for, but they make sure to show that they really care about their people—by taking time to mentor and coach, by getting to know their people on a personal level, through frequent two-way communications, by recognizing and celebrating performance, by taking personal responsibility for mistakes in their department, and by acting quickly to resolve interpersonal conflicts or address other work-related concerns. This more humane approach results in a generally positive work climate (at least most days). People who work for tough bosses consistently characterize them as “tough but fair”—and generally feel a great deal of loyalty and respect for them.
Lest the picture seem too rosy, though, the challenge of working for a tough boss should not be minimized. They are usually intense and highly driven individuals. Their demanding (and sometimes perfectionistic) expectations undoubtedly create a fair amount of tension and stress for those who work for them. The difference is that employees understand that their drive for results is not personal or mean-spirited—it is meant to benefit both them and the organization.
It is important to note that tough bosses place a heavy emphasis on employee development and spend a great deal of time mentoring and coaching their subordinates. This focus, coupled with their adherence to high standards, helps to ensure that their organizations are continuously building a pipeline of strong, well trained future leaders. Ultimately, this is their greatest legacy to the long-term success and sustainability of their organizations.
While it should come as no surprise, participants in our studies were adamant that tough bosses should not be admonished or cautioned to tone it down simply because they set the bar high for their subordinates and are not necessarily easy to work for. In fact, they made a very strong case that tough, demanding, and results-oriented leaders are absolutely essential for organizational success—and we could not agree with them more.
Assessing Toxic Leader Behaviors
Some of you are by now probably thinking to yourself: Is my boss a toxic leader? Or, hitting a little closer to home: What about me—am I toxic or just tough? To get a handle on either answer, here are the most common toxic behaviors that we uncovered in our research. Check “yes” to any and all that seem to apply.
# Toxic Leader Behaviors
Do you:
- Care about achieving results so much that you fail to consider the impact of the work and schedule on employees and their families
- Excessively focus on your own pay and promotions
- Take credit for the work of others
- Always think you are right and that your ideas are the best ones
- Fail to get to know your employees on a personal level
- Unconcerned about or oblivious to employee morale
- Fail to allow discussion or debate because you consider it a threat to your authority
- Often make short-term decisions that make you look good but that are likely to be detrimental to the organization in the long-run
- Appear charming and personable to your boss but treat your employees badly
- Engage in angry tirades and/or attack people verbally or physically
- Intentionally seek to threaten, intimidate, or humiliate people
- Treat people unfairly, inconsistently, and with a lack of respect
- Blame others for mistakes but take no personal responsibility
- Have an inflated sense of self-importance
- Commit to meeting goals without securing the proper funding, resources, or personnel
- Fail to mentor or develop your empl0yees
- Create a climate of fear, anxiety, or mistrust at work
Getting a Handle on Toxic Tendencies
It is really hard to be objective about yourself, so it’s a good idea to invite other people to weigh-in. You must risk being vulnerable and ask for direct and candid opinions about your effect on others. You will get the most benefit from talking with colleagues and friends who you know will be brutally frank with you (although it will undoubtedly be hard to hear).
Get an executive coach who can help you critically examine yourself and who can also provide you with strategies and tools to support you as you make adjustments to your way of operating at work. Take time to listen and pay closer attention to your impact on others. If you have not yet explored the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI®), consider taking this assessment to learn more about your preferences and personality style. Participate in your company’s system of 360-degree feedback assessment to see how you are coming across to your boss, peers, and subordinates at work.
Work on improving your self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills—all of which make up your emotional intelligence. The data showing that emotional intelligence is a key differentiator between star performers and others is irrefutable. [xiv]
Above all, though, refrain from making excuses to yourself or others about your use of power and authority in ways that are motivated, at least in part, by ego and self-interest. After all, these are your negative behaviors—own them. Any change is tough, but until you decide that changing yourself is absolutely required and you begin the hard work that it will take to get there, leading with a toxic twist will remain your default modus operandi—and it will ultimately derail your career.
Assessing Tough Boss Behaviors
Now that you have some idea about toxic tendencies, here are the most common tough boss behaviors that we uncovered in our earlier studies. Check “yes” to any and all that seem to apply.
# Tough Boss Behaviors
Do you:
- Care about achieving results but also consider the impact of the work and schedule on your employees and their families
- Have tough and demanding expectations for yourself and your subordinates about achieving results
- Have a high level of self-awareness, empathy, and emotional maturity
- Show care and concern for your people
- Act professionally and with self-control at work
- Seek to resolve conflicts fairly and quickly
- Give credit and recognition to others
- Celebrate and reward the successful efforts of your subordinates
- Treat people fairly, consistently, and with respect
- Take time to mentor, coach, and develop your subordinates
- Take personal responsibility for mistakes in your unit or department
- Make decisions that are in the long-term best interest of the organization
- Seek to develop a positive and respectful work climate
So What?
Hopefully these checklists have provided a quick way for you to assess your own behaviors (or those of your boss). Why is this important? Armed with this knowledge, on an individual level, you can decide to proactively change some of your less desirable behaviors in order to stay on a positive leadership track at work. For organizations, clearer distinctions between toxic leaders and tough bosses can help with quicker identification of both. This means that tough bosses can be more quickly recognized and rewarded for their constructive leadership style, and toxic leaders can be paired with a coach or mentor in an attempt to get a handle on their destructive tendencies; however, if they can’t or won’t change, the sad truth is that the best option is to show them the door.
Hopeful Signs for the Future
The evidence is overwhelming that toxic leaders permeate the highest levels of most organizations in fairly large numbers, they are destructive, and they cause significant damage to both their people and their organizations—but there is still reason to be optimistic about the future. The U.S. Army has relieved a number of high-ranking toxic officers for creating negative toxic command climates in recent years. Numerous corporations have similarly terminated high-flying senior executives for their abusive behavior at work—despite the fact that they were getting results. In addition, the Healthy Workplace Bill— legislation that would provide legal redress for health-harming mistreatment occurring at work—has been considered (but not yet adopted) by legislatures in more than two dozen states [xv].
Key Takeaways
Really smart organizations have already figured out that they will not be able to attract and retain really great people by allowing them to be treated like $@*%. That heavy-handed “do as I say because I said so” style of leadership is uninspiring, demoralizing, and often destructive which is why, thankfully, it is rapidly going the way of the dinosaur.
Enlightened companies understand that employees work at their best when they are treated with trust, respect, and fairness—timeless values that really matter to people and which will never go out of style. At the same time, organizations are waking up to the fact that abusive leaders drive away talent, making them simply too expensive to keep—regardless of their ability to deliver results. The new strategy emerging when it comes to dealing with toxic leaders is simple and goes something like this: Find them, fix them, or fire them. [xvi]
So, here’s a word to the wise: a new day is coming when toxic leaders will be viewed as irrelevant relics of a long ago past—the workplace equivalent of dinosaur fossils. In many advanced organizations, that day is already here. The choice for toxic leaders is now clear: change or become extinct.
Endnotes
[1] Daniel, T.A. (2009). “Tough Boss” or Workplace Bully?: A Grounded Theory
Study of Insights from Human Resource Professionals. Doctoral Dissertation, Fielding
Graduate University. Retrieved fromhttp://gradworks.umi.com/33/50/3350585.html; and
Daniel, T.A. & Metcalf, G.S. (2016, in press). Stop bullying at work: Strategies and
tools for HR, legal & risk management professionals (2nd and expanded edition).
Alexandria, VA: SHRM Books.
[2] Daniel, T.A. & Metcalf, G.S. (2015). Crossing the line: An examination of toxic
leadership in the U.S. Army. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2700.4969. Retrieved
from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274252085_Crossing_the_Line_An_E
xamination_of_Toxic_Leadership_in_the_U.S._Army.
[3] Steele, J.P. (2011). Technical Report 2011-3: Antecedents and consequences of
toxic leadership in the U.S. Army: A two year review and recommended solutions. Ft.
Leavenworth, KS: Center for Army Leadership. Retrieved
fromhttp://usacac.Army.mil/CAC2/Repository/CASAL_TechReport2011-
3_ToxicLeadership.pdf.
[4] Ulmer, W.F. (2012, June). Toxic leadership. Army, 47-52 at 48.
[5] Reed, G.E. (2004). Toxic leaders. Military Review, 67-71. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/reed.pdf.
[6] Personal email communication on April 1, 2015 with LTG Walter F. Ulmer, Jr.
(U.S. Army, retired).
[7] Personal email communication on March 31, 2015 with LTG Walter F. Ulmer, Jr.
(U.S. Army, retired).
[8] Ibid.
[9] Matsuda, D. (2014, May 24). A study of Army suicides in Iraq in 2010 in
- Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140524145604-76082895-astudy-
of-army-suicides-in-iraq-a-2010-study-in-2014-context.
[10] Workplace Bullying Institute (2014). 2014 U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey.
Retrieved from http://workplacebullying.org/multi/pdf/WBI-2014-US-Survey.pdf.
[11] Daniel (2009).
[12] Ibid.
[13] Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Online). Retrieved fromhttp://www.merriamwebster.
com/dictionary/malice.
[14] Wilkins, M.M. (2014, December 31). Signs that you lack emotional
intelligence. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved fromhttps://hbr.org/2014/12/signsthat-
you-lack-emotional-intelligence.
[15] Healthy Workplace Bill. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.healthyworkplacebill.org/bill.php.
[16] Owens, D.M. (2014, March 1). Dr. David Posen’s prescription for work stress.
SHRM’s HR Magazine, 59(3), 44.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their sincere appreciation to LTG Walter
Ulmer (U.S. Army retired) for taking the time to generously share his insights,
suggestions, and critique on earlier drafts of this article. General Ulmer is truly a rock
star in terms of his groundbreaking research and writing which has helped to create
greater awareness and understanding about the problem of toxic leadership. His work
is also helping to shape the dialogue about response strategies now taking place within
the highest levels of the U.S. Army and other branches of our military service.
© Copyright by Teresa A. Daniel, JD, PhD & Gary S. Metcalf, PhD. 2015. All Rights Reserved.
publications, Teresa | Teresa Daniel | 
June 25, 2020 3:31 pm | 
Comments (0) 
Subscribe