**2. Mapping the origins**

The existence of the dark side of leadership could be traced back to the human civilization, but leadership as a concept has always been a synonym of positivity. Up till now, very few researches have really explored the dark side of leadership. Military has been the major research area for the construct until last decade. Even though this concept has been evolving, it is still indistinct. Certainly, authors do not convey an understandable picture of it and label this dark side differently: destructive [4], bad [5], evil [6], charismatic [7], narcissist [8], aversive [9], bullying [10], abusive [11] and toxic [12, 13]. The origin of the construct could be traced from the progress of research of the similar concepts of dark leadership.

Toxicity is acutely sniping. Toxic derives from Greek mythology: *toxicus* means "poison." Dr. Marcia Lynn Whicker was the first to link toxicity with leadership and discussed in her research three types of leaders within workplaces: "trustworthy (green light), the transitional (yellow light), and the toxic (red light)."

upshot of incompetent big-headed and reckless leaders. Toxicity in leadership has been run-

In some point in our professional careers, we have experienced choking situations which heave the stress and anxieties leaving us with low self-worth. Then we try to locate reasons for our problems and finally the blame is shared between circumstances and the environment we work in, but hang on, is it actually only the result of toxic environment? Maybe we are so honey trapped by some toxic leaders who by virtue of their personality and style leave us in a worse-off situation than where they found us. They are venomous and bad to the bones of the organizations. What contaminated that environment? A recent report by workforce consulting firm "Life Meets Work" [2] claims that 56% of employees endure a toxic leader and his venomous behaviors leading to an obnoxious environment. Another research [3] by psychologist Nathan Brooks and Dr. Katarina Fritzon of Bond University and Dr. Simon Croom of the University of San Diego claims that around one in five bosses are found psychopaths in the upper echelons of the corporate world. That is a scary figure, which surely reveals that the problem of toxicity is so prevalent in the corporate corridors which gradually decay their

For many of us we are no stranger to such situations directly or indirectly. However, still we wonder how we get trapped and how we were mistaken about the style of our leader. Media reports are full of numerous cover stories of corporate scandal or political scams unveiling the

Let us begin with a small case of Mr. Shetty, a revenue breeding executive director in an IT firm. He was not the easiest person to deal with. Although he had many awards and recognitions appreciating his excellent technical qualities and industry knowledge, his unpredictable behavior and culture of fear got on to people's nerves. Shetty was manipulative, unethical, had angry outbursts, and critical about almost everything that others had done. He never shared credit with teams and was always involved in some sought of vengeance, compelling people to adhere to his instructions. Does this sound familiar? Beware, you may find lots of situational similarities within the literature; just fasten your seat belt to start a journey of

The existence of the dark side of leadership could be traced back to the human civilization, but leadership as a concept has always been a synonym of positivity. Up till now, very few researches have really explored the dark side of leadership. Military has been the major research area for the construct until last decade. Even though this concept has been evolving, it is still indistinct. Certainly, authors do not convey an understandable picture of it and label this dark side differently: destructive [4], bad [5], evil [6], charismatic [7], narcissist [8], aversive [9], bullying [10], abusive [11] and toxic [12, 13]. The origin of the construct could be

traced from the progress of research of the similar concepts of dark leadership.

ning in nerves of the organizations and in societies from their inception.

subordinates' morale, motivation and self-esteem.

leaders that violated public trust.

148 Dark Sides of Organizational Behavior and Leadership

exploring this lethal style of leadership.

**2. Mapping the origins**

The repertoire of toxic leaders covers a broad spectrum; it depends more not only on what they really are but also on how people perceive them. For some, they might be toxic and for some a charismatic hero [12]. It is quite difficult to craft a differentiation between destructive leaders that are genuinely toxic, bad leaders that are not toxic but are incompetent only in managerial skills and leaders with mental disorders and good leaders that are wicked people. The present state of research in the related concepts of dark leadership could be drawn together in the form of **Figure 1**. It clearly defines toxic leadership as an umbrella term including all other dark leadership constructs.

Much earlier, Reed [15] enquired the symptoms whether subordinates feel humiliated or deenergized after interpersonal exchange and whether the less powerful are victimized more than the powerful? Study justified both the symptoms of followers of toxic leadership. The approach was phrased as the "kiss up and kick down tendency," where the toxic leader presents himself as a responsible and responsive follower to his superiors but acts miserably to his own subordinates.

**Figure 1.** Illustration on the research of the related constructs under the gamut of toxic leadership. Source: adapted from Thoroughgood et al. [14].

Lipman-Blumen [12] analyzed toxic leadership as having serious outcomes in the long run rather than in the short term. Their strong personality may mask their deliberate ill intentions in the short term but have detrimental after-effects on individual and organization in the long run. Identifying a toxic leader is not a cake walk. One must evaluate the consequences, rather than the transitional effects of the leader's influence on the follower. Recent studies by Mehta and Maheshwari [16] and Singh et al. [17] also reaffirm these thoughts.

leadership has on teaching as well as learning in schools. These include intolerable working relationships amongst stakeholders, which in turn produced a multitude of negative effects. While contrasting old and new leadership, Green [22] emphasized the transition of effective leadership from a reliance on power to a reliance on trust. Without risk, learning cannot happen. Without trust, risks become a rarity. Toxic leaders can be self-destructive sometimes because they lack interpersonal skills and emotional intelligence. Believe it or not, they are hoarders as well. They dig out information, resources and tasks to their subordinates in order to maintain tight-fisted control on them. Their modus operandi is culture of fear. The subordinates are threatened with negative consequences which seems interesting sometimes as a direct and easy technique to achieve the task but infuse toxicity to the organizational climate. Authoritarianism is the favorite terminology in a toxic leaders' dictionary. They do not care about the learning of a subordinate or team building, instead at every given opportunity, they denigrate them and act as if the subordinate is disposable and nothing more than a tool for them to use. Forget about the subordinate's view point, even their agreement to official decisions has also no relevance as they are bound to follow a toxic leader's decision. They like to

Toxic Leadership: The Most Menacing Form of Leadership

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.75462

151

Kellerman [5] in his study placed the bad leader's behavior on a band ranging from ineffective/incompetent to unethical/evil. When they embrace authority, toxic leaders—those who enjoy bullying others with their abusive behaviors and command total control—can be distinctly effective. However, regardless of some short-term benefits, toxic leaders bear out to be highly malicious and jeopardize the organizational success and sustainability, reveal many

A toxic leader appears like a negative ninja who finds pleasure in turning every other thing and situations to a negative one. Such leaders are always finding ways to inflate the dark aspect of any situation or project, dragging down the morale and enthusiasm of their subordinates. For them counterproductive performance holds even greater credence than other

One of the most damaging types of abuse is the marginalization of employees over non-merit factors or feelings of jealousy for those who have developed more advanced levels of critical thinking, and are viewed as threats to those in current leadership positions. "If work is perceived as a zero-sum game of winners and losers, then toxic leadership is a sensible strategy for presenting oneself as a winner," states Kenneth Matos, the vice president of research for Life Meets Work. "However, if an organization depends on long-term collaborative work to

The overall literature available highlights one important aspect of toxic leadership and that is, in leadership study the focus is often on individual leaders rather than on the process assimilating both follower and the context. Although we need to probe individual antecedents

positive performance while rating their overall performance.

**4. What stimulates a leader's toxicity?**

succeed, toxicity advances the leader at the expense of the organization."

micro-manage.

latest researches.

An extensive literature available does not put toxic leadership in the normal category of impaired mental health, evil intentions or casual mismanagement. However, it could be construed as maliciously intended leadership behaviors that spitefully burn down efficiency and enthusiasm of the subordinate in inevitable ways.

Our empirically doctoral research on the dimensions of toxic leadership in Indian IT professionals deciphered the construct as a multidimensional construct. It could be described as "those narcissist, self-promoting leaders who by their derisive supervision, managerial incompetency and erratic behaviors intentionally tend to erode their self-esteem, burn out their employees, breed counterproductive performing subordinates and future overbearing bosses." Toxic leaders' authoritative and abusive methods not only present long-term risk for the organization but also trickledown to the society and the nation.
