Leadership Derailment
Leadership is intertwined with all the concepts discussed in this course. While a great deal of research has been conducted on what makes for effective leadership, there is also a fair amount of research on why leaders derail, falter and fail. In this assignment you are to conduct a literature review on the topic of leadership derailment and report back on what you discovered.
Literature Review
Various studies have indicated that for many years the emphasis of the research in leadership has centered on the favorable aspects of leadership. Much is previously published about leadership including ‘leadership by the numbers’: five practices, seven habits, fourteen principles, and twenty-one rules (Bogue, 2010) among others. Nonetheless, due to the past scandals and numerous crises such the 2008 economic slump in the United States and the rest of the world have attracted many studies to examine the dark side of leadership (Inyang, 2013). (Inyang, 2013). The dark side of leadership is generally known as the leadership derailment; and Inyang (2013) states, leadership derailment is a scenario of leadership failure. The literature review intended here is to present an analytical grasp and knowledge on the issue of leadership derailment based on the selected relevant studies.
Causes of leadership derailment
It is of interest to begin on the causes of the dark side of leadership since it is the basis for the foundation of grasping the notion. The research conducted by Inyang (2013) employed a qualitative survey approach by reviewing the secondary material to examine much about the leadership derailment. Some of their elements of consideration of the study include causes, repercussions, and management solutions of the derailment. The causes of leadership derailment are multi-facet and are excoriated through by a combination of organizational, situational, and behavioral elements (Inyang, 2013). (Inyang, 2013). He classified the cause into three main categories: behavioral, situational, and organizational elements. Einarsen, Aasland, and Skogstad (2007) on their research of ‘Destructive Leadership,’ derailed leadership was classified as one of the destructive leadership. Einarsen and his colleagues came to the same inference on causes of derailment leaders.
Thus, it is obvious that derailed leaders come from performance difficulty with the organizational activities, inability to adjust to current events or to establish the needed abilities, intimidating to other staff members through adopting the bullying, intimidating, and abrasive style of management. Einarsen, Aasland, and Skogstad (2007) argued that derailed leaders are connected with being overambitious. So they spend much of their time thinking about how to continue rising on ranks rather than executing their duties; they spend more effort in attempting to please the upper management, and they are unable to adapt quickly to superiors with different leadership skills (Einarsen, Aasland & Skogstad, 2007). (Einarsen, Aasland & Skogstad, 2007). The two studies arrived at the same deductions that the derailed leadership has detrimental repercussion to the organizational outcomes (Einarsen, Aasland & Skogstad, 2007; Inyang, 2013). (Einarsen, Aasland & Skogstad, 2007; Inyang, 2013). Therefore, the causes of leadership entirely revolve around, the obstacles that situations and dynamism of the environment offer to leaders hence inhibiting their contact with other people inside the organization to deliberate on the organizational goals successfully.
Traits of leaders in relation to style of leadership
Some research have focused on the attributes of the derailment leaders. For instance, Beycioglu (2014) studied the attributes leading to leaders’ derailment through focusing on the Dark Triad. The dark triad refers to a description of three socially undesirable psychological traits: psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism (Beycioglu, 2014). (Beycioglu, 2014). Psychopathy is defined as a remorseless manipulation, the pattern of callous, and manipulation of others. Machiavellianism refers to individual variances in insincerity, callousness, and manipulation. On the other hand, narcissism is defined by domination, exploitation, exhibitionism, and sentiments of entitlement and superiority (Beycioglu, 2014). (Beycioglu, 2014). The Dark Triad or the three personality qualities positively connect with laissez-faire, abusive, and passive leadership styles; furthermore the traits negatively correlate with transformative leadership (Westerlaken & Woods, 2013). (Westerlaken & Woods, 2013).
The relationship between these attributes and leadership are regarded to be non-linear as revealed by studies such as Benson and Campbell (Beycioglu, 2014). (Beycioglu, 2014). Thus, the type of excellent leadership and bad leadership may be determined from the dark triad interaction with leadership. According to Beycioglu (2014) indicates that the leaders with medium scores dark triad facets have superior leadership ratings as compared to the leaders with the extreme scores, both low and high. This novel approach to the causes sheds more on the relationship between the derailed leadership and the type of leadership while the research by Einarsen, Aasland, and Skogstad (2007) and Inyang (2013) relate derailed leadership with the situation, environment, and organizational activities. Despite the increased interest in dark side of leadership the existing empirical evidence is sparse (Harms, Spain & Hannah, 2011). (Harms, Spain & Hannah, 2011).
Since behavioral elements may lead to derailed leadership, it therefore pushes the focus to the relationship existing between the relationship-oriented leader and task-oriented leader behaviors and derailment leadership. This will reveal the finest kind of leadership to take whenever faced with a circumstance. Braddy et al. (2014), conducted a research on 966 leaders who attended a program involving leadership development; and these leaders were graded by the supervisors, direct subordinates, and peers. The grade includes an implication that deliberates on an insight into leadership derailment. The researchers reported their findings analytically by random coefficient modeling, relative weight analysis, and polynomial regression. The random coefficient modeling demonstrated that assessments from the self-direct report, peer, and supervisor on leadership behavioral vary and connected with career derailment ability. Polynomial regression study demonstrated that leadership derailment potential is lowest if self-ratings are lower in contrast to other ratings of leader conduct. On the other side, relative weight analysis provided an indication that self-rating mattered the least while peer ratings contributed the most when forecasting leadership derailment potential of a leader (Braddy et al., 2014). (Braddy et al., 2014).
The researchers determined from this study that low career derailment potential is dependant on a leader who is exhibiting a combination of both task-oriented and relationship-oriented conduct that appeal to supervisors, peers, and direct reports (Braddy et al., 2014). (Braddy et al., 2014). From this reasoning, it is obvious that failing to acquire the correct matching or mix of task and relationship-oriented behaviors is like self-defeating since it may result to the derailment. It is therefore possible that excessive insensitivity to the things contributing to acceptable duty as well as the relationship behavior may be considered as a blunder. The style of leadership and attributes of leaders are interrelated, and leaders must choose intelligently the style of leadership to apply to each particular situation.
Consequences of disrupted leadership
Derailed leadership is not a virtue consequently it results in repercussions. According to Inyang (2013), leadership derailment has catastrophic effects to an organizational system as a whole. Its repercussions fall on the individuals as followers, stakeholders, and organization (Inyang, 2013). (Inyang, 2013). Einarsen, Aasland, and Skogstad (2007) similarly came up with the same deduction regarding repercussions of derailing leadership. Some of the repercussions are bullying, humiliation, manipulation, and fooling subordinates; and at the same moment participating at ant-organizational behaviors such as absenteeism, perpetrating frauds, and withdrawing from work (Einarsen, Aasland & Skogstad, 2007). (Einarsen, Aasland & Skogstad, 2007). The previous corporate failures are in various regions of the world corroborate to the premise that derailed or failed leadership does not only damage each and every facet of an organization, but it also transcends outside the organization circumference (Inyang, 2013). (Inyang, 2013).
Some effects of the wrecked leadership as revealed by researchers depict excessive overstepping of bounds. For any issue, such leaders can only continue staying in power if they have tolerant followers. The acolytes let derailed leadership free rein because they are frightened to lose the accompanying benefits, being so weak that they cannot stand up to them, or for fear of consequences that may befall them if they protest (Van Den Broeck & Venter, 2011). (Van Den Broeck & Venter, 2011). However, this does not ignore the reality that such atmosphere or situation need for principled leadership. Since the repercussions of derailed leadership are adverse and widespread, it is a good idea to look at the solutions for overcoming these problems.
Strategies for preventive and minimizing disrupted leadership
Leaders should acquire self-awareness as a strategy of minimizing derailment. This can be done in two areas: the way others view them and their dark side tendencies (Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). (Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). This can be done through coworker feedback. The ratings acquired in the form of feedback will provide leaders with ratings and will help them to understand the perception of others about them. Data from both the peer and subordinate is crucial as they are the persons most exposed to the behaviors linked with derailment (Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). (Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). Inyang (2013), also via reviewing secondary materials came up with the strategy of self-awareness. Through efficient recruiting and selection, organizations may also decrease the likelihood of letting the derailed leaders and managers into the system (Inyang, 2013). (Inyang, 2013).
Hogan, Hogan, and Kaiser (2010) questioned selection as a technique of blocking the derailment into the system since derailed executive exhibits a resemblance to successful executives such as being ambitious and brilliant. Nevertheless, some features distinguish successful executives from the wrecked executives, for example, derailed leaders readily lose their composure and have inflated self-Assessment (Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). (Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). So that indicates that while employing recruitment and selection as a tactic of preventing derailment in the organizational structure, the panels must be extra careful. Executive coaching is crucial in growing leaders to adhere to the circumstances to prevent sliding into the derailment zone. The procedure trains the personnel in time so that when they climb to high ranks, they would be aware enough to know how to manage hard challenges. When provided with the important and relevant lesson, these personnel will deliver outcomes to the organization in the long-run (Inyang, 2013; Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). (Inyang, 2013; Hogan, Hogan & Kaiser, 2010). Apart from the executive coaching, there is also leadership training which gives the development behavior and skills that are useful for leadership performance and prevention of derailment. The leaders must thus be tested through growth assignments as well as leadership challenges to increase the accomplishment of the training objectives.
To sum up, the leadership derailment is a vice and has major effects for organizations, individual, and other people out an organization. It causes are known. Also, the derailment association with the leadership styles and leaders qualities is also well documented. Thus, organization and other stakeholders engaged should commit their efforts to ensuring that they adopt proper approach to reduce and prevent leadership derailment. More studies should also be undertaken concerning the topic to discover hidden facts such as the reasons for the presence of links derailment and leadership styles and features of leaders.
References
Inyang, B. J. (2013). (2013). Exploring the idea of leadership derailment: Defining new research agenda. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(16), 78-85.
Braddy, P. W., Gooty, J., Fleenor, J. W., & Yammarino, F. J. (2014). (2014). Leader behaviors and career derailment potential: A multi-analytic technique investigation of rating source and self–other agreement. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), 373-390.
Einarsen, S., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstad, A. (2007). (2007). Destructive leadership behaviour: A definition and conceptual model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 207-216.
Beycioglu, K. (Ed.). (2014). (2014). Multidimensional perspectives on principal leadership effectiveness. IGI Global.
Bogue, G. E. (2010). (2010). Leadership legacy moments: Visions and ideals for stewards of collegiate mission. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Westerlaken, K. M., & Woods, P. R. (2013). (2013). The link between psychopathy and the Full Range Leadership Model. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(1), 41-46.
Van Den Broeck, H., & Venter, D. (2011). (2011). Beyonders: transcending average leadership. Lannoo Meulenhoff-Belgium.
Hogan, J., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2010). (2010). Management derailment. APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 3, 555-575.
Harms, P. D., Spain, S. M., & Hannah, S. T. (2011). Leader development and the dark side of personality. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(3), 495-509.
