Toxic Leadership in the Military

2020 ◽

Vol 26 (1) ◽

pp. 182-185

Author(s):

Alexandru Baboș ◽

Raluca Rusu

Keyword(s):

Cultural Differences ◽

Theoretical Approach ◽

Personal Characteristics ◽

Toxic Leadership ◽

Military Organization ◽

The Military

AbstractThe toxic leadership refers to destructive behaviours and leaders’ personal characteristics which cause serious damage to the subordinates and organizations. Still, what is toxic for the military in one country can be good in another one, given the cultural differences. This article wants to emphasize, from a theoretical approach, the main characteristics and effects of toxic leadership within the military organization.

Download Full-text

Toxic Leadership in the Military

Muma Business Review ◽

10.28945/4577 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 ◽

pp. 065-079

Author(s):

Anthony L Hinen

Keyword(s):

Viable Alternative ◽

Leader Behaviors ◽

Toxic Leadership ◽

Senior Leaders ◽

Senior Leader ◽

Emotional Quotient ◽

Toxic Environment ◽

Mitigation Techniques ◽

The Military ◽

Over 40 Years

In over 40 years in the workplace, I have witnessed creativity and communication stifled because of toxic leadership. Though my experience was in the military and my research was with the military, my goal is to better understand toxic leadership to inform potential mitigation techniques that are applicable to both business and military environments. Toxic leaders tend to draw conclusions hastily without thinking about viable alternative conclusions. They tend to weave a negative story out of the facts known to them and not appreciate that there is information or facts they do not know. My research suggests toxic leadership exists because senior leaders, those leaders above the toxic leader, allow it to exist, either unwittingly or knowingly. Furthermore, non-toxic leaders can create toxic environments by their inaction or inability to make timely decisions. That inaction allows problems to develop, then fester and ultimately, creates a toxic environment. Also, non-toxic leaders can create toxic environments by not dealing with incompetent subordinates, like the senior leader who allows a toxic leader to continue to act out toxic behaviors. Incompetent subordinates generate problems that can contribute to a toxic environment due to their technical shortcomings or low EQ (emotional quotient). The most effective mitigation is confronting and reporting toxic leader behaviors when they occur.

Download Full-text

The Impact of Toxic Leadership in Theater of Operations – Afghanistan

Land Forces Academy Review ◽

10.2478/raft-2020-0021 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 25 (3) ◽

pp. 175-180

Author(s):

Cristian Ene ◽

Alexandru Baboș ◽

Marius Bucurenciu

Keyword(s):

Analytical Approach ◽

Cultural Background ◽

Toxic Leadership ◽

Severe Damage ◽

Personal Traits ◽

Military Organization ◽

The Military ◽

The Impact

AbstractThe toxic leadership point out damaging attitudes and behaviours which can affect leaders’ personal traits resulting severe damage to the organization and its subordinates. Given the multinational environment from a theatre of operations, what might be toxic for the military in one country might be accepted in another one, taking into consideration the discrepancies between cultures. No matter their cultural background or their national particularities, the toxic leaders reduce the effectiveness of the organization and of it’s operations. This article wants to highlight, from an analytical approach, the existing types of toxic leaders and their impact to the military organization in Afghanistan theatre of operations.

Download Full-text

Toxic leadership in defense and federal workplaces: sabotaging the mission and innovation

International Journal of Public Leadership ◽

10.1108/ijpl-04-2018-0023 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 14 (3) ◽

pp. 179-198 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Kenneth R. Williams

Keyword(s):

Federal Government ◽

Self Awareness ◽

Toxic Leadership ◽

Convenience Sample ◽

Content Type ◽

Military Performance ◽

Use Of Resources ◽

Personal Bias ◽

The People ◽

The Military

Purpose Military officers and government officials have a duty to serve selflessly, without personal bias or favoritism, demonstrating effectiveness and the efficient use of resources for the safety, security and thriving of the people. However, some abuse subordinates for personal or professional gain. The purpose of this paper is to discuss toxic leadership, its cost, effects and impact and provides recommendations for prevention and intervention. Design/methodology/approach Based on survey research of a convenience sample of military and federal government students at the National Defense University, the paper does not allow for generalizability, but presents patterns and trends in descriptive statistics. Findings The sample of 186 reported an average of 2.9 toxic leaders in an average of 18.3 years of service. Student observations of the most toxic leader they served identified high prevalence of all toxic behaviors with the most prevalent being a lack of self-awareness, a negative interpersonal style, suspicion of others, passive hostility, defensiveness, refusal to allow dissent and shaming and blaming. The frequency and degree of impact on targets, witnesses, and teams of toxic leadership were significant, especially in avoidance, worry, and decreased contribution, motivation and productivity. Practical implications These results indicate that toxic leadership degrades military performance and readiness and government efficiency. Organizations can effectively address toxic leadership through purposeful, cultural reinforcement and leader development, increasing efficiency and reducing waste. Originality/value Although civilian and public research exists, this is the first and only such research in the military and federal government and lays a foundation for further study of these organizations.

Download Full-text

A STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE APPROACH TO LEADING DIVERSIFIED TEAMS: A CASE STUDY OF THE U.S. MILITARY

International Journal of Advanced Research ◽

10.21474/ijar01/12938 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (5) ◽

pp. 1017-1075

Author(s):

Erbynn S. Bedzo ◽

Keyword(s):

Transformational Leadership ◽

Organizational Commitment ◽

Transactional Leadership ◽

Organizational Context ◽

Practical Importance ◽

Toxic Leadership ◽

Military Leaders ◽

American Military ◽

The Military ◽

The U.S

Leadership is an essential - even defining - part of military institutions. Sincemodern militaries are firmly hierarchal organizations defined by regulations and expectations, the context intricately tends toward transactional leadership. Moreover, the modern American military sees little criticism or externaloversight compared with the past, a circumstance that may lead to the development of deficient or even toxic leadership practices in a substantial minority of situations. On the other hand, the very notion of transformational leadership arose in part from observing the successes of charismatic military leaders such as General Eisenhower. The idea of transformational leadership has risen to the forefront of leadership research in business and the overall organizational context due to certain advantages concerning motivating and empowering followers. However, despite its military roots, it has rarely been applied to the military background in recent research. Transformational leadership has the potential to offer advantages in crucial areas such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and desire to stay. However, transactional leadership also provides some benefits. Therefore, this mixed-methods exploratory study seeks to explore the leadership styles that are present in the U.S. military today and their effect on the critical outcome variables of satisfaction, organizational commitment, and desire to stay among the military personnel. Given the high cost of turnover in a context as training-intensive as the military, these are essential outcomes with evident practical importance.

Download Full-text

Democrazy—Dem Go Craze, O: Monitoring the 1999 Nigerian Elections

Issue A Journal of Opinion ◽

10.1017/s1548450500005862 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 27 (1) ◽

pp. 29-33

Author(s):

Darren Kew

Keyword(s):

Transition Program ◽

The Political ◽

High Stakes ◽

Political Class ◽

Soccer Match ◽

The Public ◽

The Military

In many respects, the least important part of the 1999 elections were the elections themselves. From the beginning of General Abdusalam Abubakar’s transition program in mid-1998, most Nigerians who were not part of the wealthy “political class” of elites—which is to say, most Nigerians— adopted their usual politically savvy perspective of siddon look (sit and look). They waited with cautious optimism to see what sort of new arrangement the military would allow the civilian politicians to struggle over, and what in turn the civilians would offer the public. No one had any illusions that anything but high-stakes bargaining within the military and the political class would determine the structures of power in the civilian government. Elections would influence this process to the extent that the crowd influences a soccer match.

Download Full-text