Shall We Serve the Dark Lords? A Meta-Analytic Review of Psychopathy and Leadership (original) (raw)
Related papers
Leader psychopathy and organizational deviance
International Journal of Workplace Health Management
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between leader psychopathy and organizational deviance. In particular, the authors introduce employee’s psychological safety as the mediator. Furthermore, the moderating role of moral disengagement in the relationship between leader psychopathy and organizational deviance is also considered. Design/methodology/approach The data of this study include 611 certified nurses from 9 university hospitals in Turkey. The proposed model was tested by using hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Findings The results of this study supported the positive effect of leader psychopathy on organizational deviance along with the mediating effect of employee’s psychological safety. Furthermore, when the level of moral disengagement is low, the relationship between leader psychopathy and organizational deviance is weak, whereas the effect is strong when the level of moral disengagement is high. Practical implications The findings of t...
While the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) has gained increasing attention as a measure of noncriminal psychopathy, absent has been research involving samples including business people. This study investigated the validity of the PPI with such a population by examining the association between psychopathic traits and moral decision-making among MBA students. Sixty-six MBA students were assessed using the PPI, the MACH-IV (a measure of Machiavellianism), the Ethical Position Questionnaire (EPQ), and the Defining Issues Test (DIT-2). Only PPI Machiavellian Egocentricity was associated with level of post-conventional moral reasoning. MACH-IV Machiavellianism was a stronger predictor of the Subjectivist ethical position than were PPI subscales. However, a combination of MACH-IV Machiavellianism and four PPI scales accounted for 46% of the variance in Subjectivism. Results suggested that Machiavellian Egocentricity and Machiavellianism are distinct constructs. Benning, Patrick, Hicks, Blonigen, & Krueger (2003)’s two factor model of the PPI was also supported. In general, the findings provided further validation for the PPI as a tool for assessing psychopathic traits among “mainstream” individuals, including business people.
Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy of Top Managers
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 2020
Numerous studies show that high levels of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) in firms positively influence firm performance. Yet, high levels of Dark Triad (DT) traits-narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy-of managers might work detrimental to EO. Our study empirically tests if top managers who score high on Dark Triad traits have a negative influence on firm performance, reducing the merits of EO. Results of a survey study on 191 firms show that all three dimensions of the DT, narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy, suppress the positive effects that EO has on firm performance. Accordingly, selfish behaviour, emotional coldness, propensity for duplicity, and top managers' quest for selfpromotion, status, and dominance lead to behaviour that reduces the positive influences around innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking of EO.
How to Neutralize Primary Psychopathic Leaders’ Damaging Impact: Rules, Sanctions, and Transparency
Journal of Business Ethics
Primary psychopathy in leaders, also referred to as successful psychopathy or corporate psychopathy, has been put forward as a key determinant of corporate misconduct. In contrast to the general notion that primary psychopaths’ destructiveness cannot be controlled, we posit that psychopathic leaders’ display of self-serving and abusive behavior can be restrained by organizational contextual factors. Specifically, we hypothesize that the positive relationship between leader primary psychopathy on the one hand and self-serving behavior and abusive supervision on the other will be weaker to the extent that the organizational context (clear rules and policies, sanctionability of misconduct, and transparency of behavior) is stronger. Three studies (one experiment, one survey of leader–subordinate dyads, and one survey of teams) showed that clear rules in particular weakened the positive association between leader primary psychopathic traits and their self-serving and abusive behavior. Ex...
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2012
Although psychopathic personality (psychopathy) is marked largely by maladaptive traits (e.g., poor impulse control, lack of guilt), some authors have conjectured that some features of this condition (e.g., fearlessness, interpersonal dominance) are adaptive in certain occupations, including leadership positions. We tested this hypothesis in the 42 U.S. presidents up to and including George W. Bush using (a) psychopathy trait estimates derived from personality data completed by historical experts on each president, (b) independent historical surveys of presidential leadership, and (c) largely or entirely objective indicators of presidential performance. Fearless Dominance, which reflects the boldness associated with psychopathy, was associated with better rated presidential performance, leadership, persuasiveness, crisis management, Congressional relations, and allied variables; it was also associated with several largely or entirely objective indicators of presidential performance, such as initiating new projects and being viewed as a world figure. Most of these associations survived statistical control for covariates, including intellectual brilliance, five factor model personality traits, and need for power. In contrast, Impulsive Antisociality and related traits of psychopathy were generally unassociated with rated presidential performance, although they were linked to some largely or entirely objective indicators of negative job performance, including Congressional impeachment resolutions, tolerating unethical behavior in subordinates, and negative character. These findings indicate that the boldness associated with psychopathy is an important but heretofore neglected predictor of presidential performance, and suggest that certain features of psychopathy are tied to successful interpersonal behavior.
Do psychopathic traits predict professional success?
Journal of Economic Psychology, 2018
Does psychopathy predict professional success? Psychopathy and professional success are multidimensional constructs, and thus certain elements of psychopathy may be related more strongly to certain elements of professional success. Also, psychopathic traits, comprising self-centered impulsivity, fearless dominance, and coldheartedness, may not predict professional success above and beyond the Big Five. We investigated whether self-centered impulsivity, fearless dominance, and coldheartedness predicted professional satisfaction (satisfaction with salary, with promotion, and with career) as well as material success (annual salary, number of promotions, and professional standing) in an occupational sample (N = 439). Selfcentered impulsivity was inversely related to professional satisfaction, whereas fearless dominance was positively related to professional satisfaction and material success. Coldheartedness was related to neither of them. Adding the Big Five, as well as participant gender and time in job, as predictors revealed that extraversion and selfcentered impulsivity predicted professional satisfaction, whereas only extraversion predicted material success; fearless dominance was no longer a significant predictor of material success. Taken together, self-centered impulsivity was negatively linked, whereas fearless dominance was positively linked, to professional success. The findings highlight the differential contribution of impulsiveness-versus fearlessnessrelated elements of psychopathic traits to professional satisfaction.
Factor structure of the B-Scan 360: A measure of corporate psychopathy
Psychological Assessment, 2013
Psychopathy is a clinical construct defined by a cluster of personality traits and behaviors, including grandiosity, egocentricity, deceptiveness, shallow emotions, lack of empathy or remorse, irresponsibility, impulsivity, and a tendency to ignore or violate social norms. The majority of empirical research on psychopathy involves forensic populations most commonly assessed with the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), a 20-item rating scale that measures 4 related factors or dimensions (Interpersonal, Affective, Lifestyle, and Antisocial) that underpin the superordinate construct of psychopathy. Recently, researchers have turned their attention to the nature and implications of psychopathic features in the workplace. This research has been hampered by the lack of an assessment tool geared to the corporate/ organizational world. Here we describe the B-Scan 360, an instrument that uses ratings of others to measure psychopathic features in workplace settings. In this study, large samples of participants used an online survey system to rate their supervisors on the B-Scan 360. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a reliable 20-item, 4-factor model that is consistent with the PCL-R 4-factor model of psychopathy. Although more research is needed before the B-Scan 360 can be used in organizational settings, we believe that these results represent an important step forward in the study of corporate psychopathy.
Apt to be unethical: functional psychopathy in organizations
International Journal of Human Sciences Research, 2023
In this article, we carry out a theoretical analysis on how the person with characteristics similar to those of Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) has the social skills to thrive in an individualistic and greedy society. We show that the ability to adopt unethical behaviors can be crucial for these people to appear as assertive, capable, and accomplishing professionals. They are not only able to achieve individual results but, above all, to lead teams aimed at achieving the ambitious goals of their organizations. Such individuals are known as functional psychopaths. From a psychological point of view, a large part of the indicators related to functional psychopathy seems to be associated with changes in the regulatory function that emotions play a part in the human decisionmaking process. Functional psychopathy represents a challenge for organizational managers and staff in human resources sections. Furthermore, the evaluation processes, primarily based on organizational results, are not very sensitive to differentiate between (1) lack of empathy and courage; (2) selfishness and zeal; and (3) manipulation and leadership. It can be concluded that only more sophisticated, laborious, and costly processes could be sensitive enough to identify those people and their perverse work strategies during the selective and evaluative processes in the business environment. So, they are all around us, and, given the cultural orientation of companies toward individualism and greed, they are probably here to stay.
The purpose of this study was to examine the relations of two facets of psychopathic personality (i.e., self-centered impulsivity, fearless dominance) with counterproductive work behavior (CWB-I) and contextual performance (CP). Consistent with research on psychopathy, we suggested that self-centered impulsivity (i.e., behavioral impulsivity characterized by disregard for rules and responsibilities) would be positively related to CWB-I and negatively related to CP. Underpinned by socioanalytic theory, we further suggested that fearless dominance (i.e., an egotistical personal style characterized by self-promotion and prioritization of one's own needs before those of others) would only be negatively associated with interpersonal performance (i.e., high CWB-I and low CP) when individuals indicated low levels of interpersonal influence (i.e., a dimension of political skill reflecting an ability to adapt one's behavior in subtle, sophisticated, and situationally effective ways). Results provided strong support for the differential relations of the psychopathic personality dimensions with the criteria of interest. Implications for theory, practice, and future research are provided in light of a number of notable strengths and limitations.
Oxford Handbooks Online, 2013
The relations between leadership, psychopathy and hormone levels are examined. A sample of 86 males is used to examine these relations. This research is based on a leadership questionnaire, a psychopathy questionnaire and saliva samples. The leadership questionnaire consists of 9 factors: Intelligence, creative thinking, empathy, charm, agreeableness, risk taking, need for achievement, need for affiliation and taking charge. The psychopathy questionnaire consists of the factors boldness, disinhibition and meanness. T--test analyses show that leaders score significantly different on most leadership factors compared to the control group. Bivariate correlation analyses show correlations between all leadership factors and psychopathy (with the exception of the leadership factor intelligence), which indicates that leadership and psychopathy are related. Additionally, leaders score significantly higher on the psychopathy factor boldness. The literature indicates that leaders should have higher testosterone levels and lower cortisol levels compared to the control group. The results of the saliva study suggests the exact opposite, leaders have a significantly higher cortisol level. This finding is probably the result of high stress levels. There are little significant results for testosterone, which is probably caused by high stress levels.