**4. Five basic and stable features**

In this section five basic features will be described, that can help us to distinguish leadership abilities that were mentioned in the Introduction. Usually it is not possible to predict with certainty who will fit a leadership position (there are too many unknown criteria that should be met) but it is often possible to predict who will probably not be able to manage the leadership in a satisfactory way. Thus, only indications of poor leadership will be focused.

#### **4.1. Trust in others**

*Trust in others*—an important part of the IWM—is shaped early during responsive caregiving. The term trust in others (which originates from Bowlby [34] and regards infants) has in adults a wider meaning than just to trust other persons. In adults, a more suitable term could be to *understand others' intentions* [18, 19]. Having that ability—or feature as it is called here—facilitates trust in others.

#### *4.1.1. Understanding is not necessary for interaction*

For our successful interaction with others, a good understanding of their intentions may appear to be a prerequisite. However, it is also possible to interact successfully without really understanding much of others' intentions. As long as the own actions are relevant responses to others' behaviors, the interaction is perceived as successful, whether others' intentions are understood or not. So, normally, relying on an adequate repertoire of schemas may work quite satisfactory. In fact, quite often, those who are perceived as markedly socially competent put an effort on such an attitude because they have a poor early development [18, 42] (they want to "belong") and because they have a deficient understanding of others' minds [4, 6, 19].

Although social competence is very important in situations when it is required, it should never be a major merit for a leader. When social competence is a major attribute of a person, we can be pretty sure that this person has been carried far in her/his career without much of other essential merits. If so, this is an indication of a deceitful conduct, and we can assume that it is also a cover for a number of severe deficiencies.

#### *4.1.2. Cooperation is not a matter of course*

For a person who has a difficulty to understand others' intentions, a fear for negative impact (such as being used, undervalued or criticized) is not well balanced by an insight in others' true—and often positive—intentions. For this person, selfless cooperation for mutual profit is not a matter of course [43]. Often, other persons' kind offers to help are perceived as derogating criticisms [44] and other persons' humble requests for help are perceived as unjustified and stressful demands [16]. When such a person collaborates or helps others, often it is only to get credit for the positive attitude, and it is not an altruistic effort to accomplish a good result for the benefit of all or to unselfishly help others [16, 45].

### **4.2. Trust in self**

the scope of this chapter. However, for the purpose of identifying detrimental leaders, we can

In this section five basic features will be described, that can help us to distinguish leadership abilities that were mentioned in the Introduction. Usually it is not possible to predict with certainty who will fit a leadership position (there are too many unknown criteria that should be met) but it is often possible to predict who will probably not be able to manage the leader-

*Trust in others*—an important part of the IWM—is shaped early during responsive caregiving. The term trust in others (which originates from Bowlby [34] and regards infants) has in adults a wider meaning than just to trust other persons. In adults, a more suitable term could be to *understand others' intentions* [18, 19]. Having that ability—or feature as it is called here—facilitates trust in others.

For our successful interaction with others, a good understanding of their intentions may appear to be a prerequisite. However, it is also possible to interact successfully without really understanding much of others' intentions. As long as the own actions are relevant responses to others' behaviors, the interaction is perceived as successful, whether others' intentions are understood or not. So, normally, relying on an adequate repertoire of schemas may work quite satisfactory. In fact, quite often, those who are perceived as markedly socially competent put an effort on such an attitude because they have a poor early development [18, 42] (they want to "belong") and because they have a deficient understanding of others' minds [4, 6, 19]. Although social competence is very important in situations when it is required, it should never be a major merit for a leader. When social competence is a major attribute of a person, we can be pretty sure that this person has been carried far in her/his career without much of other essential merits. If so, this is an indication of a deceitful conduct, and we can assume

For a person who has a difficulty to understand others' intentions, a fear for negative impact (such as being used, undervalued or criticized) is not well balanced by an insight in others' true—and often positive—intentions. For this person, selfless cooperation for mutual profit is not a matter of course [43]. Often, other persons' kind offers to help are perceived as derogating criticisms [44] and other persons' humble requests for help are perceived as unjustified and stressful demands [16]. When such a person collaborates or helps others, often it is only to get credit for the positive attitude, and it is not an altruistic effort to accomplish a good result

ship in a satisfactory way. Thus, only indications of poor leadership will be focused.

use the following five basic features quite well.

*4.1.1. Understanding is not necessary for interaction*

that it is also a cover for a number of severe deficiencies.

for the benefit of all or to unselfishly help others [16, 45].

*4.1.2. Cooperation is not a matter of course*

**4. Five basic and stable features**

**4.1. Trust in others**

106 Leadership

*Trust in self* is initially built up by feedback from the caregiver [18], both positive and negative, both verbal and nonverbal. In this is included the picture of the self, abilities, personal significance and rights that the parents usually imprint [32]. Later on, also perceived success and failure are important factors.

#### *4.2.1. Dependence on others' opinions*

For a person who has a poor early development, the understanding of self is too minimal to be of much help, and the opinions from other persons will become more important. S/he will spend much efforts to assure that the desires for self-worth and social "belonging" are met [16, 18]. During the years when the youngster is very keen on adjusting to the social environment where s/he wants to be accepted, this person is extra vulnerable since the externally perceived impressions are not well balanced by an internal guide of reference. The result may be an oversensitive person who is "streamlined" to fit whatever is required: performance, looks, language use, and so on and who may become a high performing, insensitive, and intolerant young adult [41].

This kind of (over-)sensitivity (which is a lack of self-worth and resilience) should not be mistaken for the sensitivity that comes with an ability to be receptive/observant and to understand another person. The first is a self-centered attitude and an indication of poor early development, whereas the latter emerges from a genuine interest and an insight in other persons minds and is commonly not a clearly exposed ability.

#### *4.2.2. High self-esteem or inflated self-esteem?*

A young person who has a poor early development often is anxious to be accepted, or rather, to be appreciated, and is prone to do what is required to reach that goal. The appreciation (n.b., often in a rather narrow area) may give this person a sense of high self-esteem, which, as discussed in more detail by Baumeister et al. [40], should not be mistaken for a promise of a generally high performance. It may in fact be an indication of the opposite.

#### *4.2.3. Conflict management*

For a person who has a poor early development it is more difficult to manage conflicting situations (regarding moral issues as well as personal conflicts) as external impressions are not well balanced by a firm self-worth [16].

#### **4.3. Flexibility**

In adolescents and adults3 *flexibility* can be said to be the cognitive capacity to simultaneously handle and change between alternatives in values, plans and actions. Inherent in this is also the ability to handle uncertainty, as choosing among alternatives implies uncertainty [36].

<sup>3</sup> In infants, flexibility is a free will to explore the environment [28] and an ability "flexibly to change focus between toys and the parent" [20].

#### *4.3.1. Flexibility, a demanding task for the brain*

Handling complexity often requires that you have more than one thoughts in mind at the same time. Although the brain is running multiple processes simultaneously all the time (vision, hearing, balance, etc.), having several conscious thoughts in mind requires something extra [26]. Flexibility may be described in terms of how much complexity that conscious brain activities involve, in the following ways:

*4.4.1. The emergence of truthfulness*

tress or when other things get a higher priority.

• Obvious lying or bluffing.

*4.4.2. Habitual untruthfulness*

Untruthfulness may be manifest in a few slightly different ways:

nection to reality – which is not any better in a leader position.

leadership abilities s/he can be assumed to have.

*4.4.3. Untruthfulness, the reliability aspect*

• Having a hidden agenda, that is, intending to do something else than what you say.

that you have "a better value" than people who do not have or do the same.

• Idealization, that is, describing something (primarily your own state) as better than it is. • Exposing prestigious objects or other circumstances (title, relations, lifestyle, etc.) depicting

Concerning persons who have an inflated self-concept, if they really believe in their selfconcept, maybe they are not really lying or bluffing but instead they display a deficient con-

Being habitually untruthful means that the reality is not more important to the person than the fiction that s/he presents, or the consequences of that fiction. Everybody is not habitually untruthful [15], and it is also a matter of degree; the more untruthful s/he is—the less general

To most people, obvious lying is not acceptable. However, there are forms of untruthfulness that, among many people, are not only accepted but even seen as positive, as a merit. A very common example of this is when somebody pretends to be "bigger" or better in some respect, displayed in body language and appearance, in possessing prestigious items, or engagement in prestigious contexts. Strictly, these actions are meant to betray the observer (although many people do not even perceive it as betrayal), and they are accordingly untruthful acts.

When a person is habitually untruthful, s/he puts the priority of the own advantages over the priority of others (the family, company and society), particularly so, if the untruthfulness

A child that is 3 years old does not understand untruthfulness, and an alternative to truth is not comprehensible. In psychology, this is called the false belief principle [32]. This means that untruthfulness does not exist to the child during the very important time when the system is developed that will guide the person during the rest of life. The child who gets a rich early development will accordingly get a firm belief that truth is fundamental. The child who got a poor early development and was not able to build a conception of the world and self until after 4 years of age, was aware of untruthfulness by then. This child built its conception of the world with both truth and fiction/lies as feasible options that can be used as they were needed. Although a truthful attitude and behavior may be strongly influenced by parents and other factors (school, church, neighbors, friends, and society) during childhood and adolescence, there seems to emerge a particular intrinsic truthfulness from a rich early development. An important difference is that the later learned truthfulness may be easily suppressed by dis-

Knowledge in Neuroscience Can Help Us Avoid Underperforming Leaders

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.78564

109


A person who got a poor early development typically does not seem to have much of this ability (else than in a narrow area of knowledge). This person also often has rather a shortsighted approach to planning and decisions [16, 44, 46].

#### *4.3.2. Dependence on schemas*

The inflexible person prefers to do what is customary in the social (or work) environment where s/he wants to be accepted (or where s/he wants to be successful) and avoids actions that may risk desired acceptance or success. As an adult, this attitude may take the form of a dedication to social schemas that warrant a successful result [31, 47].

In an organization, this may show as a person who only does what important persons (or authorities) desire or permit. This often is a person who has a "perfect performance" or who is a "literal follower of the rules" (and who also often avoids uncertainty) and therefore never makes any mistakes. The lack of mistakes is often perceived by other persons as a sign of good judgment and skill, whereas it very well could be regarded as an indication that a good judgment in fact probably is missing.

It is usually important to follow the rules that apply but when following rules replace good judgment, then you might assume that good judgment actually is missing.

#### **4.4. Truthfulness**

In attachment research it has been well documented that adult persons with a secure attachment are inclined to tell the truth and that insecurely attached adult persons are prone to allow themselves to be untruthful [20, 29]. (However, children may very well experiment with untruthful statements before the perception of reality has matured).

#### *4.4.1. The emergence of truthfulness*

*4.3.1. Flexibility, a demanding task for the brain*

activities involve, in the following ways:

approach to planning and decisions [16, 44, 46].

in mind at the same time.

demanding.

108 Leadership

*4.3.2. Dependence on schemas*

judgment in fact probably is missing.

**4.4. Truthfulness**

Handling complexity often requires that you have more than one thoughts in mind at the same time. Although the brain is running multiple processes simultaneously all the time (vision, hearing, balance, etc.), having several conscious thoughts in mind requires something extra [26]. Flexibility may be described in terms of how much complexity that conscious brain

• When you compare the current state of things with an alternative state of things (to make a decision about, e.g., what is best), you might need to keep more than one thought or focus

• When we consider "cause and effect" connections or time dependent processes, we also often must have more than one conscious thought in mind or more than one potential focus. An application of this is a person's attitude to rules and their intentions: One can regard the intentions behind a rule as a cause, the rule as a means and when the rule is followed as an effect. To the inflexible person, such distant connections may seem too

A person who got a poor early development typically does not seem to have much of this ability (else than in a narrow area of knowledge). This person also often has rather a shortsighted

The inflexible person prefers to do what is customary in the social (or work) environment where s/he wants to be accepted (or where s/he wants to be successful) and avoids actions that may risk desired acceptance or success. As an adult, this attitude may take the form of a

In an organization, this may show as a person who only does what important persons (or authorities) desire or permit. This often is a person who has a "perfect performance" or who is a "literal follower of the rules" (and who also often avoids uncertainty) and therefore never makes any mistakes. The lack of mistakes is often perceived by other persons as a sign of good judgment and skill, whereas it very well could be regarded as an indication that a good

It is usually important to follow the rules that apply but when following rules replace good

In attachment research it has been well documented that adult persons with a secure attachment are inclined to tell the truth and that insecurely attached adult persons are prone to allow themselves to be untruthful [20, 29]. (However, children may very well experiment with

dedication to social schemas that warrant a successful result [31, 47].

judgment, then you might assume that good judgment actually is missing.

untruthful statements before the perception of reality has matured).

A child that is 3 years old does not understand untruthfulness, and an alternative to truth is not comprehensible. In psychology, this is called the false belief principle [32]. This means that untruthfulness does not exist to the child during the very important time when the system is developed that will guide the person during the rest of life. The child who gets a rich early development will accordingly get a firm belief that truth is fundamental. The child who got a poor early development and was not able to build a conception of the world and self until after 4 years of age, was aware of untruthfulness by then. This child built its conception of the world with both truth and fiction/lies as feasible options that can be used as they were needed.

Although a truthful attitude and behavior may be strongly influenced by parents and other factors (school, church, neighbors, friends, and society) during childhood and adolescence, there seems to emerge a particular intrinsic truthfulness from a rich early development. An important difference is that the later learned truthfulness may be easily suppressed by distress or when other things get a higher priority.

Untruthfulness may be manifest in a few slightly different ways:


Concerning persons who have an inflated self-concept, if they really believe in their selfconcept, maybe they are not really lying or bluffing but instead they display a deficient connection to reality – which is not any better in a leader position.

#### *4.4.2. Habitual untruthfulness*

Being habitually untruthful means that the reality is not more important to the person than the fiction that s/he presents, or the consequences of that fiction. Everybody is not habitually untruthful [15], and it is also a matter of degree; the more untruthful s/he is—the less general leadership abilities s/he can be assumed to have.

To most people, obvious lying is not acceptable. However, there are forms of untruthfulness that, among many people, are not only accepted but even seen as positive, as a merit. A very common example of this is when somebody pretends to be "bigger" or better in some respect, displayed in body language and appearance, in possessing prestigious items, or engagement in prestigious contexts. Strictly, these actions are meant to betray the observer (although many people do not even perceive it as betrayal), and they are accordingly untruthful acts.

#### *4.4.3. Untruthfulness, the reliability aspect*

When a person is habitually untruthful, s/he puts the priority of the own advantages over the priority of others (the family, company and society), particularly so, if the untruthfulness regards circumstances concerning his/her own person. Hence, if your subordinate, wife/husband or friend is untruthful to others, s/he also is prone to be untruthful to you.

more practical leadership contexts. To emphasize that a reference only regards the state of the art that the inferences are based on, and that the reference does not state a verified connection between early experiences and leadership, that reference is enclosed in an extra parentheses. The presented concept is, to my knowledge, not published before, and there are few or no studies that have studied the following inferred connections. Consequently, there is little or no strictly scientific evidence for these examples. Even so, they may be better alternatives than some of the rather unfounded concepts that are used today. This section can also be seen as a

Knowledge in Neuroscience Can Help Us Avoid Underperforming Leaders

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.78564

111

There are a few researchers who have touched upon an analysis of the background of inferior leadership; examples are Adorno et al. [15], Argyris et al. [50], Fors Brandebo et al. [51], Friedman et al. [44], Heckman [52], McCrae et al. [13] and Rubenowitz [53]. Of these, Argyris et al. have published the most complete analysis when they characterized and compared

There are a number of typical behaviors and attitudes that signify particular unproductive or detrimental mental states. It would certainly have been nice to list them here as a help for the reader. However, doing so would impede the value of them as predictors, as those who are interested in success without effort would misuse this knowledge. The following are

The person with a rich early development does normally not present much problems due to dishonesty, self-centered decisions or lack of responsibility [16, 50]. The problems they bring as leaders are often due to deficiencies that do not regard stable features, which means that they usually can be improved. Common to these persons are a low need to display prestige (so they often have a "low profile" and are not very "visible") [15, 40, 53], they do not strive for power for power's own sake (so they may lack an impressing career record) [15, 53], they may have a "democratic" stance in their leadership [51] (which in authoritarian cultures often is seen as a weak leadership) [50], they dare to do things their own way (they are often not streamlined) [15, 51], they may venture into uncertain areas or assume difficult undertakings (with a risk for substandard results, as perceived by outsiders) [15], and they do not skillfully disguise their shortcomings or aggressively deny their faults [15, 47, 50]. To many people, they do not seem as suitable for a leadership position—which may be a great mistake as it is among those that you will find the high potentials [15, 50]. Hence, this is a very diverse group

Person (1,1) (rich early development and rich life management support) may seem as the perfect choice for a leader position but that depends on what flavor of life management support that has been supplied. Although they often may have a high basic potential for successful leadership, they may have other priorities in life. As leaders, they are normally not connected

*Model I* vs. *Model II Theory-in-use* and *Single* vs. *Double Loop Learning*.

that cannot be distinguished by a simple template judgment [20].

to problems and they are accordingly not within the focus of this chapter.

collection of suggestions for future research.

*5.1.1. My best tips should not be exposed in public*

examples of general behaviors that you may see.

*5.2.1. The person with a rich early development*

**5.2. A few general characteristics**

#### **4.5. Intrinsic sense of responsibility**

Our sense of responsibility has two components: one intrinsic and one extrinsic. The *intrinsic sense of responsibility* is believed to emerge from the same location in brain as some of the IWM do [48]. How strong it is can be assumed to depend on how rich the early development was and hence how strong and dominant the early created control system is. The extrinsic responsibility emerges from the parts in our brain that are dedicated to reading, writing, counting and other abilities controlled by rules [48] and can be assumed to have been shaped at later stages of development than the intrinsic sense of responsibility. The balance between intrinsic and extrinsic depends on the balance of influences during childhood and adolescence.

#### *4.5.1. Requirements for responsibility*

Winter and Barenbaum [49] published a scoring system for responsibility, built on five descriptors: # 1 Moral standard. # 2 Obligation. # 3 Concern for others. # 4 Concern about consequences. # 5 Self-judgment.

Hence, if these criteria are not met—that is, if the scores are low—it may be reasonable to assume that the intrinsic sense of responsibility of the individual is impaired. In persons who have a poor early development, two of these criteria, # 3 Concern for others and # 5 Selfjudgment commonly are not met [20]. Therefore, persons who have a poor early development can generally be assumed to have an impaired sense of responsibility.

#### **4.6. The basic features indicate leadership abilities**

The general leadership abilities may be indicated by the basic features, as follows: (Note however, that also the influences from relevant life management support on the development of abilities are important [17, 32, 33].) The ability to spontaneously cooperate with and understand other persons is related to the feature trust in others (i.e., to understand others' intentions) [18, 19]. The ability to have integrity in conflicts is related to the feature trust in self [16]. The ability to handle complexity and uncertainty is related to the feature flexibility [15, 16]. The abilities to have a good moral judgment [17] and to distinguish between appearance and reality [20] are related to a combination of all the five basic features.
