Three Signs of Toxic Leadership

I've had bosses that have hit on me. Others that have told me all about their sex lives - in excruciating detail - while I desperately try not to: (a) laugh, (b) shudder, (c) check my Facebook page in embarrassment.

Or there was the Emotionally Needy Boss, who was mostly upset that we weren't best friends or drinking buddies. I had to constantly validate that he was doing a good fantastic job (yes, that meeting was amazing! It was the cream of the crop of all meetings of all time!). Talk about draining.

But the worst has been the Robot. To call in sick more than a couple of times was to be threatened with termination. She relished the chance to publicly berate employees for minor faults. She was the poster-child for toxic leadership.

Why? People lived in constant fear of making a mistake (she didn't tolerate lateness, distractions, talking, or complaints). Ideas were shut-down almost immediately. The workplace stifled creativity, or originality.

I once got a text message saying, quite simply, that so-and-so had been fired. The subtext: we better watch-out! 

 

Needless to say: turnover was frequent and job satisfaction was very low.

Three Signs of Toxic Leadership

1. It's all about the power: bullying, and public humiliation seem to be the primary way of interacting with and "leading" subordinates.

The Robot boss was quick to anger, and was showed no restraint in criticising employees in front others.

2. Selfishness: they're often very self-focused, inconsiderate of others, and striving for more for themselves. In fact, they could be good-old-fashioned narcissists.

The Robot boss did not understand that people could be sick, or could have cars break-down, or children fall ill. Instead of responding with empathy, she would list the inconveniences to herself and threaten to fire - she made people feel beneath her, and replaceable.

3. They're destructive: according to research, they can foster a negative image of the organization, especially among employees, and are possibly contributing to higher turnover, negative culture, and job dissatisfaction.

Under the Robot boss, staff turnover was frequent, and staff were both uncooperative and became equally as petty in their behavior as their toxic boss. They would count work done in minutes, and consider any minor activity done outside of work hours as billable.They would act selfishly: wasting clients time, and focus on the advantage that they could gain in coworker relationships. 

Manage Leadership Capability Practice And Theory

Summary of article key points:

Leadership is more about practice than theory, even if theory can inform some relevant insights as part of a leadership development programmed.

Leadership is a blend of art and science. Some leaders are born / per-equipped better than others (nature), but intelligent training and development (nurture) can enhance virtually any one's leadership capability.

Theories and models have a use, but only to underpin "practice" in leadership and real world outcomes.

Functional skills and previous performance are no guarantees of future leadership capability.

You will only get the leadership qualities that you select and train for.

The cost of promoting without leadership skills and then desperately seeking to equip people with adequate leadership skills can be high in human and economic terms.

Well-designed internal leadership academies can help when they match enhanced leadership awareness and capability to actual business needs.
______________________________________________________________________

Main article:

For centuries much has been written about the "science" and the "art" of leadership.

Most of us have read and absorbed elements of this wisdom (and too often perhaps some of the come and go fads rather than wisdom). Many of us have subsequently pondered that age-old question about leadership; "are great leaders born, or are they made"?

Based on our experiences we have found that effective leadership capability tends to arise from a little of both in terms of settling that 'nature versus nurture' debate? Sabre's recent work on a number of high-level leadership academies (including one that was integral to the Coles turnaround) has confirmed that whilst there are many valid theories and models for the "science" of leadership, it's often the "art" of leadership that still evades adequate capture and definition.

Many businesses simply don't get it right, but it's reassuring to see those that do reap the positive rewards that flow so evidently from putting in the effort.

It is certain that nature does equip some people better than others in terms of their leadership traits (from a genetic, neurological and thence a behavioural perspective). There are those who just seem pre-loaded with healthy measures of IQ, charisma and also enough EQ to meld it all together in a way that gets their people to where they need to be.

Arguably though the honing of these skills that may at first glance seem to be gifted from "nature" can be attributed in at least part also to a degree of "nurture." For example, the development of complex neurological systems and patterns that drive much of our behavior (social systems of the brain, core belief patterns and embedded personality) can be traced to responses to external stimulus over the course of a lifetime.

It is however equally certain that proper approaches to 'nurture' can be used to raise the bar for virtually anyone who wishes to play the leadership game by enhancing awareness of their own strengths, areas of struggle and weakness as they manifest day to day.

Discipline is then required to act upon those insights of self-awareness to help cultivate better leadership capability for their own personal and professional circumstances.

One thing we often see is that being gifted in a particular functional skill or specialization, even to the point of genius, is no assurance that you can then lead a group of former peers in that field (or indeed any other).

Regular experiential "practice" of leadership comes into play as a valuable tool for enhancing the quotients of leadership talent that are gifted or acquired from our own recipe of nature and nurture. In the cut and thrust of day to day work life we don't always have adequate time to discern the true source of, and impact of our leadership and team role styles.

Current research and models from such emerging fields as neuroscience confirm some leadership theories and debunk others, and are often very useful in framing approaches and delivering ongoing insight. They are at the end of the day however just more tools for the toolbox, with leadership capability itself something that needs to be lived and developed day to day and powerfully linked to real world outcomes.

One of the clearest examples that I have observed was in the military when being selected for and subsequently entering into Army Officer training. Now whilst not all attributes of military leadership are relevant to commercial or non-military endeavors, it's safe to say that many are with respect to the human dynamics of leadership (particularly leading amidst complexity).

For Officer selection the emphasis was first and foremost upon personal leadership capability (and the potential to hone it further for a military environment). It was only much later after rigorous training in general military skills and leadership that relevant specialist streaming was done into various specializations and functional skills.

In commerce the reverse is often the case, where people are selected and promoted firstly with their "functional" skills and credibility strongly in mind (e.g. a great engineer, lawyer, stockbroker, salesman) with their leadership skills seldom given the same rigorous analysis as their functional results.

The Officer selection process was designed to reveal "leadership" potential first via a careful blend of psychometric followed up with a host of mental and physical challenges that were rigorously observed by an experienced leadership selection panel. Their emphasis for selection was first upon core leadership traits exhibited under pressure, and the potential to polish those.

It was only much later that the aptitude for possible functional roles was to be explored. Functional experience and past performance, whilst taken into account if it was present, was never taken as an assurance of future leadership capability.

In commerce the best and brightest performer in a functional sense may not be the best person to lead a team of their former peers (unless they have been equipped by nature and nurture to lead also). The skills for leadership often exist outside of our functional skills, and are deserving of attention.

The military naturally values both individual leadership capability, and functional proficiency in an Officer's chosen trade post graduation (e.g. Infantry, Armour, Artillery, Intelligence etc), but the term "General Service Officer" is used to describe Army Officers upon graduation, and is used to imply that it's the "Officer" bit (your designated status as a leader) that comes first, and any functional / technical proficiency that may come later is second.

So much so that in theory any General Service Officer can be moved to or seconded into to virtually any military role or command should it be required of them. Of course you won't get far, or get much respect form peers or subordinates if you don't have some credible functional capability also, but the foundation is first your personal "leadership brand" which can be transferred into almost any other challenge.

Again, the military doesn't always get it right, but there is much to be said for the "leadership first" approach given to seeking and honing "Leadership DNA" as part of the overall process of developing organizational leadership talent. This in tandem with functional capability is ideal. Both matter, but the "personal leadership capability" bit is often overlooked in commerce (or considered as a clear second to ticking all the boxes on functional results and skills).

We have all seen people who are highly adept specialists in their given field (e.g. engineer, lawyer, doctor, stockbroker, IT professional) given leadership roles after getting runs on the board functionally speaking, without necessarily coming equipped with the requisite inter-personal and leadership awareness to handle the "non-functional" challenges of leadership.

Even being a respected genius at your chosen trade, does not ensure that you may end up out of your depth when asked to lead a cohort of your former peers (unless you have the "leadership bit" sorted first)?

The low morale, high turnover, friction and inefficiencies that can arise from poorly lead dysfunctional teams costs a great deal in both personal and economic terms This is where teams that on paper may have fall the boxes ticked for functional brilliance with their professional skills, experience and qualifications can simply fail through poor leadership and poor teamwork.

In a military environment the price paid for this is often instant, but in business it' can be slower and more insidious, but the outcome is the same, your team takes casualties and loses.

The ideal package for a leader is perhaps having enough functional proficiency to establish credibility, whilst also ensuring that they have been given ample opportunity to properly explore and develop their own leadership capability before being advanced to lead others. There is thus far less chance of being caught out of their depth in the all-important "leadership bit".

So how can business get the balance right?

It is our assertion that businesses can 'cherry pick' from the very best of the military approach by carefully designing and delivering their own internal leadership academies to target existing and emerging leaders. This enables people to build and develop upon existing leadership skills within the critical context of what they actually need to do and deliver within the business.

Time taken "outside" of the business, but very much "about" the business can really pay off when leadership development is tailored to meet business needs.

We have been involved with several wonderful examples at Coles where senior leadership skillfully identified a need to design a series of highly tailored leadership academies for enhancing personal leadership capability. This is one of the few examples where we have seen a company achieve such a wonderful balance of leadership capability development wedded to real world needs and outcomes.

Coles recognized leadership capability development as a key factor in itself and that it was by "practicing" it in tandem with cutting edge theory that worked best. It was our privilege to be invited to work with Steve Robinson and Dr Malcolm

McGregor who were brought in by the Boards of Coles and Wesfarmers to craft the overarching strategy for these approaches.

An enormous amount of design work was done to ensure that every aspect of the Academy would hone and develop each individuals leadership capability, but very much with the business in mind and putting valid personal insights immediately into practice.

The blending of theory and practice in facilitation was done very carefully to ensure constant linkages back to a leader's daily planning, interactions with their own teams and daily execution. The careful and intelligent exploration of personal leadership styles was matched to personal leadership plans and real world business scenarios. This was all within an environment that focused meaningfully upon people taking responsibility for and ownership of their own development and the impacts of their behavior (in both tailored simulations and shared real world case studies).

Participants were existing leaders within the business, and emerging leaders with high potential who were engaged in meaningful pre programme diagnostics followed by an intensive 7 day residential programme with targeted follow though, mentoring and coaching back into the business.

Theory was carefully linked to real world and business case studies were used throughout and the targeted experiential content was linked powerfully and intelligently to individual profiling and learning. Leadership was lived and "practiced" throughout.

All approaches used were of sufficient complexity and sophistication to meaningfully engage intelligent leaders (there certainly weren't any tacky reality TV show rip off team games or treasure hunts). This is very much along the lines of what most successful military academies embrace, and that is to take the time to properly select leaders then develop and hone personal leadership capability itself as a powerful enabler for better functional capability and success to follow.

Some well selected theory is fine, but at the end of the day it's all about putting it into practice.

This was reflected in the outcomes that ensued for the many alumni of this Coles academy, and the turnaround demonstrated by Coles as a company and as a brand.

Yes there is a price to pay in terms of taking key people outside of the 'day to day' business for a time, but it's important not to forget that ongoing development of leadership capability is still very much "about the business" when it's done well.

Investing in leadership capability in this way removes the "lucky dip" approach of selection primarily for a person's functional skills, then finding out all too late that real world productivity and lost opportunities has been caused by poor leadership that transfers into low performing teams.

Three Simple Leadership

Simplifying the complex process of leadership? If so don't be ashamed because most leaders are. Whether you are taking your first steps as a leader or have been leading people for decades the leadership process is full of complexities. In this article I will show you how to simplify the leadership process using just one letter; impossible right?

There are many theories and acronyms floating around the Internet that all claim to be able to solve the riddle of leadership's complexity, and while some of them are helpful, most of them are incomplete and inconsistent.

Today I introduce you to the three P's; Professionalism, People, and Productivity. When these three areas are executed properly leadership is effective, efficient, and simplified. Think of the 3 P's as a dart board, the outer ring being Professionalism, the middle ring People, and the bull's eye being Productivity. An effective and efficient leader must be diversified in these areas, starting on the outer ring and working inwards. Leaders that just aim straight for the bull's eye will indeed accomplish their task by hitting Productivity, but they will lose their respect and employee efficiency because they have neglected the Professionalism and the People rings.

Now we will break down the three P's referencing a car.

Professionalism: This is the door to leadership, the process can be opened or lost here, and you are the key. A leader's professionalism enriches their leadership competencies; it adds instant value to their actions and decisions. Professionalism consists of preparedness, integrity, knowledge, and morals.

People: This is the engine that drives leadership, without it you will go nowhere. Establishing the correct relationship with your employees is an essential step in achieving efficiency. This is done by developing the precise approach to unlocking their potential. People consist of respect, motivation, selfless service, and personal courage.

Productivity: This is the GPS of leadership, where do you need to go? You have already opened the door and started the engine, now you need a precise route to victory. Productivity consists of directions, clarity, communication, and enforcement.

Mastering the three P's will undoubtedly optimize and simplify your leadership process. The three P's should be used a guideline or checklist just as a great leader I know used the three M's; mission, men, and me. As you lead your employees ask yourself, have I established and maintained my professionalism.

Top Leadership To Improve Your Business

Some of the most impressive top leadership professionals do on a regular basis. There is no doubt that every healthy business is growing and changing on a regular basis. To be an effective leader, you need to do some things on an automatic basis. That is, these are the types of things you need to do all of the time without having to think about doing them. It shows you are a good leader. No matter if you are a business manager, top employer or a member of the human resource team, doing these things matters.

  Do You Encourage Others to Speak Up?      
 
One of the jobs of the best business manager and employers is to simple encourage employees to speak up. The employee should not feel as though he or she cannot approach the top employer or a member of the human resource team with questions, concerns or just to say hi. Are you approachable?

Do You Make Decisions?

There are times when you may need to get the entire human resource team together to make decisions. Yet, most of the best managers are able to make decisions right away. Successful leaders are decision makers and they are good at it. You don't want to waste time and potentially put off a problem.


Do You Make Expectations Clear?


Another thing good leaders do is to ensure everyone who is working for them understands the expectations. You should be able to communicate well, but you also need to be able to clearly define the expectations of those working for you. Do you show your vision and make it actionable for those who are working with you?

Are You Accountable?


Another key defining element that every good leader needs to be is accountable. If you say you are going to do something, accomplish a goal or make a call, you do it. You cannot manage others effectively if you cannot be held accountable for your actions and words. It plays right into the goal of leading by example. You want your employees to feel at easy following you.


Top leadership does these things not once in a while but every single day. To be an effective leader, whether in a human resource team or a business manager, you need to ensure that these qualities come through clearly.

How to Become A Better Leader

If you are striving to become a better leader for your job, a stronger leader to better run your own business, or looking to develop the leadership skills you've always known you've had, there are a number of easy tips and guidelines you can follow to drastically improve your leadership skills. Being a strong leader by definition means that you have the ability to lead and act in an instance of leading, or guiding others in a leadership role. This means you must be someone that not only people look up to, but someone who people have confidence in, and will want to work with to accomplish your goals. Any motivational speaker or leadership expert will tell you that strong leaders are not born, they are made. It takes years of experience, successes, and failures to become a strong leader. One excellent way to become a better leader is to learn from those already established in high leadership positions. Find a mentor or someone in your organization that is an already established leader, and ask them about their experiences, how they came to this position, and how they learned to be a successful and strong leader themselves. Most of the time, these individuals will be more than happy to help you in any way they can, including explaining to you what they have done to become the leader they are today. Strong leaders are able to influence, guide, and shape the attitudes and beliefs of all of those around them, as well as able to inspire confidence and cooperation. Once you understand that leadership is more of a behavioral skill than an innate natural trait, you can learn to become a better leader by studying who a leader is supposed to be and putting these tips into practice. Leaders make the most out of every opportunity that comes their way. Leaders also don't make excuses for themselves but take full responsibility for all of their actions. A leader is one who inspires confidence and has a natural charisma about them that inspires cooperation and loyalty. One step to becoming a better leader is becoming a better listener, as well as a better team player. If you want to lead from the front, sometimes this means leading from the back or the middle. Sometimes a strong leader needs to know when to step aside, and when to take charge. A good leader is one who listens carefully to everyone around them, then has the strength and wisdom to make the best decision. A strong leader is not one who barks orders at people, but inspires cooperation among their employees, and inspires them to work harder as well as making them feel valued and respected. Leaders are not only people that inspire confidence but also have a clear direction and purpose for where they are heading. A leader who has a strong personal vision is a leader who not only commands respect but also respects others as equals and contributors to their great vision. If you are looking to become a better leader, then you need to first decide what kind of leader you want to be and have a clear vision and purpose so that others will follow.