Academy of Management Executive, 2002. Vol 16, No. 1

The long-term organizationalimpact of destructivelynarcissistic managers

Hoy Lubit

Executive OverviewDestructive narcissism (DN) is both a common and significant problem in organizations.

The outward self-confidence, drive for power, and ruthlessness of destructivelynarcissistic managers (DN managers) facilitate their rise to positions of power. At thesame time, their devaluation of others, singular focus on what is best for themselves,and difficulties in working with others can markedly impair an organization's moraieand performance, and even drive away the most talented employees. Most largeorganizations have enough DN managers to present a significant and costly problem.

This article begins by discussing the nafure and origins oi DN and then moves on toexplore how DN can simultaneously facilitate the rise of managers to positions of powerand do significant damage to the organizations they work for. Two detailed case studiesare provided. The article discusses why DN managers are able to survive and prosper insome organizations despite their destructive behavior, how people can recognize DNmanagers more quickly, and how to design organizations to decrease the prevalence ofDN managers. Finally, the article provides recommendations for how other managers,executives, and boards of directors can deal with DN managers and CEOs.

Destructively Narcissistic Managers and Leaders:A Serious Problem

A significant number of managers have a degreeof destructive narcissism {DN) in their personah-ties. One reason is that certain personality traitscommonly but not exclusively found in DN helppeople to rise within management structures.These traits include high levels of expressed self-confidence, magnetic enthusiasm, and unrelentingdrive to attain prestige and power.' DN managersare also frequently good at organizational politics.They can charm superiors, manipulate people, andforge quick, superficial relationships.^ Their ruth-lessness, drive, ability to make tough decisionsquickly, and ability to generate enthusiasm in oth-ers help them to climb the rungs of power and to beeffective in some aspects of leadership.

When the DN of managers reaches high levels,however, many problems arise.^ Their grandiosity,devaluation of subordinates, sense of entitlement,lack of values, and search for excitement can dosignificant damage to an organization. They can

compromise their business unit's long-term perfor-mance by driving away the most talented people.They divert people's energies away from their realwork, foster a problematic culture, and sometimesmake reckless business decisions.

This article begins by examining the behavioraltendencies of DN individuals. It moves on to dis-cuss two possible origins of DN, how DN individu-als are able to rise to power, the effects they haveon the business units they lead, and what situa-tions are likely to evoke the most detrimental as-pects of their personalities. The article then dis-cusses how to recognize DN managers before theycause significant damage to their organizationsand how organizations can most effectively dealwith them.

Narcissism: Definition and ImpactThe term narcissism comes from the Greek myth

of a beautiful youth who callously spurned theaffection of others until he fell in love with his ownreflection in a fountain. He stayed by the water in

127

128 Academy oi Management Executive February

a futile attempt to possess the reflection he sawand pined away. In modern usage by social scien-tists, narcissism concerns our feelings about our-selves and how we regulate our self-esteem.

Healthy versus Destructive NarcissismHealthy narcissism is based on relatively secure

self-esteem that can survive daily frustrations andstress. Failure to attain desired goals, criticism,and seeing the success of others may cause disap-pointment, but it does not threaten the self-imageof healthy individuals as worthwhile, valuablepeople. In addition to the self-confidence it pro-vides, we need self-esteem to tolerate frustrations,stand up for our beliefs, and maintain commit-ments to values. Secure self-esteem and healthynarcissism are also necessary to relate in ahealthy manner with others, i.e., empathize withothers, enjoy true friendship and intimacy, andinspire confidence in others.

Although both healthy and destructive narcis-sism provide outward self-confidence, they arevery different phenomena. The grandiosity of DNmanagers may appear to be due to high levels ofself-confidence, but it is not. Rather, it is frequentlya reaction to (an attempt to seal over) fragile self-esteem. Lacking healthy, stable self-esteem, DNindividuals tend to devalue and envy others andsometimes develop a grandiose self-image. Whenunder stress that threatens their fragile self-esteem,they can suffer a serious decline in functioning andbecome depressed or enraged. While the solid self-esteem of healthy narcissism supports concern forthe rights and well-being of others, DN managers donot respect others' rights and are frequently arro-gant, devaluing, and exploitative in their interactionwith others. Finally, a person with healthy narcis-sism may enjoy power, wealth, and admiration but isnot obsessed with them, as is the DN manager. Whileboth healthy narcissism and DN support an individ-ual's ability to appear confident, they are fundamen-tally very different.

DN managers do not respect others'rights and are frequently arrogant,devaluing, and exploitative in theirinteraction with others.

Destructive Narcissism: Defining Characteristics^

The defining characteristics of destructive nar-cissists are (1) grandiosity (inflated sense of self-importance, arrogance, preoccupation with power

and wealth, excessive seeking of admiration), {2} asense that they are entitled to have whatever theywant, including a willingness to exploit others toget it, and (3) lack of concern for and devaluation ofothers. Frequently accompanying traits are a lackof enduring attachment to a set of values and aninner emptiness that leads them to seek excite-ment despite high risks. DN individuals often donot realize that their behavior is a problem forothers and are not concerned about their behav-ior's detrimental impact on others if they areaware.

Interpersonal relations are markedly compro-mised by destructive narcissism. DN individualslack real empathy for others and are unable tounderstand others in depth. Rather than relating toothers as human beings with rights and needs, DNindividuals are concerned only with how othersserve their own needs for admiration, support, andidealized figures to identify and merge with. WhileDN individuals may transiently idealize peoplewith power who support them, they generally dis-parage and exploit others, including former idols.Constantly hungry and envious, they seek what isnot theirs, simply because someone else has itrather than because it has intrinsic value for them.Preoccupied with reinforcing their self-esteem,they greedily extract admiration from others. De-valuation of others helps them to avoid envy butleaves them feeling empty, They believe they de-serve special treatment and are entitled to beserved. They see nothing wrong with their behav-ior, since they feel they are special and are entitledto better treatment than they give to others. Deval-uation of others, a sense of entitlement, and lack ofconcern for the rights of others color almost all oftheir relationships.

The overwhelming focus of DN individuals onreinforcing their self-esteem undercuts any deepattachment to values and leads them to betrayconvictions in the pursuit of self-interest. The in-ability to form true caring bonds to others or to aset of values, in combination with their lack of trueself-love, leaves them with a sense of emptiness.Intense ambition, grandiose fantasies, and asearch for excitement are abortive attempts to dealwith their emptiness and underlying feelings ofinferiority.

DN individuals sometimes have a strong para-noid streak. In order to ameliorate their sense ofshame, they devalue others and project their badself-image onto them. They can be suspicious, mis-trustful, hypersensitive, argumentative, and proneto ascribe evil motives to others. They are preoc-cupied with the hidden motives of others and ex-aggerate threats. They look for signs of shameful

2002 Lubit 129

conduct in others in order to support the projectionof their own shameful self-image onto others.Since almost anyone placed under a microscopecan be found to have faults, DN individuals cangenerally find reasons with a grain of truth fordevaluing someone they dislike. Viewing theworld as hostile and forbidding, they trust only afew chosen subordinates, cater to them to keeptheir loyalty, and demand total devotion in return.Lacking real connections to people, they often usenew allies to betray old ones. When DN managersslide from simple devaluation of others to a para-noid stance, their ability to contribute productivelyto their organizations markedly deteriorates.

The aging process with its decrease in abilitiesand attractiveness is particularly difficult for DNindividuals. In middle age they typically devaluethings they once liked, since inevitably thesethings have failed to bring the narcissistic gratifi-cation they hoped for. They have no gratitude forthe joys of younger years and resent the fact thatthese pleasures are no longer available to them.They feel aggression and rage over present andpast frustrations. They also devalue the work ofpeople who still have hopes and those things thatthey cannot have or be. They feel humiliation, sus-picion, and anger toward people they depend on,rather than gratitude. Especially destructive totheir organizations is their tendency to cling topower rather than hand it over to the next genera-tion in a timely fashion. Table 1 compares thecharacteristics of healthy and destructive narcis-sism.

Adaptive and Nonadaptive Aspects ofDestructive Narcissism

Although destructive in many ways to a manag-er's job performance, DN can help a manager risein an organization. The high levels of expressedself-confidence found in DN can be useful in gain-ing the confidence of others. People often assumethat self-confidence flows from competence andtherefore trust those with great self-confidence.Moreover, by selecting subservient lieutenantsand eschewing independent ones, DN managerscan surround themselves with loyalty and praise,furthering the impression of competence.

Although destructive in many ways to amanager's joh performance, DN can helpa manager rise in an organization.

DN also leads to driving ambition that enables aDN manager to make the sacrifices necessary torise in an organization and frees the person fromnormal restraints on behavior. The ruthlessnessand Machiavellianism of DN managers, whicharise from lack of concern for others and lack ofattachment to values, can help them rise throughthe ranks. They are willing to manipulate others toachieve their goals, steal credit for the work ofothers, and scapegoat others. Although lackingempathic concern for others, DN individuals mayhave "street smarts" that enable them to assesswhom they can manipulate and what levers to pullto manipulate them. They can feign interest in

Table 1Comparison of Healthy and Destructive Narcissism

Characteristic Healthy Narcissism Destructive Narcissism

Seli-contidence

Desire for power, wealth,and admiration

Relationships

Attitude toward authorily

Ability to follow a consistentpath

Foundation

High outward seli-confidence in linewith reality

May enjoy power

Real concern for others and their ideas;does not exploit or devalue others

Variable

Has values; follovi's through on plans

Healthy childhood with support for self-esteem and appropriate limits onbehavior toward others

Grandiose

Pursues power at all costs, lacks normalinhibitions in its pursuit

Concern limited to expressing socially appropriateresponse when convenient; devalues andexploits others without remorse

Submits to authority transiently, either whentemporarily idealizing a superior or believingthat submitting will lead to concrete benefit;believes he/she should be in charge; sees self asexempt irom normal rules

Lacks values; easily bored; oiten changes course

Traumatic childhood undercutting true sense ofself-esteem and/or learning that he/she doesn'tneed to be considerate of others

J

130 Academy o/ Managemezit Executive February

Others and play up to their bosses. Their drivingambition and lack of restraint can make them mas-ters oi organizational politics.

Being able to rise through the managerial ranksis not synonymous with being a good manager. Amulti-decade study by the Gallup Organizationfound that for workers to be most productive, man-agers need to be clear on what they expect peopleto do, provide workers with the materials neededto do their work well, provide them with an oppor-tunity each day to do what they do best, providerecognition or praise at least once a week, demon-strate concern for them as people, and encouragetheir development.^ Because they lack concern forothers, DN managers are likely to be weak on thefirst three of these characteristics and very weakon the last three. As a result, their subordinatesgenerally do not function up to their capabilities.

Destructive narcissism particularly limits theability of managers to work effectively with col-leagues and subordinates. Their arrogance, senseof entitlement, lack of concern ior others' feelings,devaluation oi others' abilities, and desire for thelimelight generally seriously compromise theirability to work in teams. Moreover, they not only doa poor job of developing people but alienate sub-ordinates as a result of their devaluation oi others,insistence on having their own way, lack oi empa-thy, and willingness to exploit others. Obsequiousindividuals working for a DN manager are likely tobe promoted; the best people are likely to leave.Furthermore, the good ideas of subordinates arelikely to be disparaged lest they draw attentionaway irom the narcissistic manager. Meanwhile,no one dares to criticize the DN manager's ideas, soboth creativity and critical assessment of ideas arecrippled. In sum, DN managers are markedly com-promised in their ability to work with subordinatesand peers.

Destructive narcissism particularly limitsthe ability of managers to workeffectively with colleagues andsubordinates.

They are also frequently weak at implementingprograms. Their desire for excitement to fill theirsense of boredom and emptiness, along with theirlack of attachment to a set of values, leads to rapidchanges in interests. As a result, DN managerstend to make sudden and repeated changes inorganizational plans, never finishing the processof building needed core competencies or finishingprojects. Moreover, the DN manager may fail to pay

attention to details, being interested primarily inthe grand plans. The DN manager's failure to fol-low through on projects can markedly undercut abusiness unit's performance.

In summary, destructive narcissism in managershas widespread and complex effects. At the sametime that DN personality traits may help managersrise within an organization, these same traits im-pair their ability to lead effectively. As we shalldiscuss later, the characteristics of the specific or-ganization are also important in determiningwhether DN managers can rise within its ranks.

Case Studies of Destructive NarcissismThe foregoing general description of the DN

manager's characteristics is brought into focus inthe following two case studies.

Study One: William Agee

Newspaper and magazine articles describingthe alleged behavior of William Agee, former CEOof Morrison Knudsen, provide good illustrations ofdestructively narcissistic behavior.^ One cannotcredibly analyze someone's personality from a dis-tance without ever interviewing the person. Onecan, however, say that actions described in pub-lished accounts are illustrative of destructivelynarcissistic behavior. Therefore, the followingparagraphs are not meant as an analysis of Wil-liam Agee but are simply a recounting of newspa-per descriptions of managerial behavior often as-sociated with DN.

Agee's career took off quickly. A Harvard MBA,he became CFO of Boise Cascade at age 31 andthen CEO of Bendix (a $4 billion-per-year auto-parts manufacturer) in 1976 at age 38. He ran intotrouble at Bendix as a result of rapidly promotinghis assistant to VP and allegedly having an affairwith her; they were later married. His attempt tobuy out Martin Marietta backfired, leading to thesale of Bendix to Allied Corp. Despite his difficul-ties at Bendix, he became CEO of Morrison Knud-sen {a dam, bridge, and factory builder) in 1988.

Newspapers reported grandiose and entitledbehavior. He converted the company's massiveboardroom into his own office. In addition to ar-ranging a high salary and oversized bonuses forhimself and living unusually lavishly, he report-edly misused company funds to such an extent thatcompany employees reported it to the IRS. Ageewas alleged to have used company money ior per-sonal legal iees, Waterford Crystal for himself, andpetunia beds at his home. He ran the companyfrom his home in Pebble Beach, rather than from

2002 Lubit 131

corporate headquarters, flying executives backand forth to his house. In a particularly remarkableself-glorifying act, he replaced portraits of thecompany's founders with a life-sized portrait ofhimself and his wife that he commissioned at com-pany expense.

Agee allegedly devalued others and got rid ofpeople who threatened to detract from his prestige.He treated subordinates badly and undercut tal-ented people who might take away some of theglory he sought. Agee was described as having a"high-and-mighty manner." He fired people withlittle or no warning, including high-ranking, tal-ented managers. When the board of directorsseemed to view people favorably, Agee was re-ported to have stated that they were not good per-formers, and then horror stories about them wouldappear. A company executive reported that Agee's"inner circle was made up of sycophants and yesmen. People at the next level down caught hell.. . .He was afraid to have talent around."

Descriptions of Agee's behavior show little at-tachment to values and a willingness to be unusu-ally deceptive in order to give the impression thathe was doing a good job. He treated the corporateboard to lavish meetings away from companyheadquarters, making it hard for board membersto have access to other company officials. More-over, information provided to the board about thecompany's financial condition was reported to bemarkedly skewed, and accounting practices weredeceptive to shareholders. For example, it is al-leged that Agee reported money from the sale ofbusinesses as operating rather than nonrecurringincome, giving the false impression that the com-pany's construction and rail businesses were go-ing well. When the company filed claims to recoverunexpected costs on construction projects, themoney was often immediately booked as revenueseven though the claims might never be paid.

Accounts of Agee's behavior illustrate the exces-sive risk taking in which destructively narcissisticindividuals often engage. For example, he movedinto areas where he and the company lacked ex-pertise, such as large, risky construction contracts.Similarly, without commissioning research (as faras a company top executive knew), he moved thecompany into building a new locomotive and ar-ranged to build new passenger railroad cars with-out building a prototype. The company's initialsuccess with railroad cars came when another firmdid the design and engineering for the cars. In timethe contracts Agee entered into for locomotivemanufacturing led to large losses. He was finallyfired aiter Morrison Knudsen lost $310 million in1994.

Agee's behavior so alienated people at MorrisonKnudson that when he was iired as CEO, the em-ployees gathered in the parking lot oi companyheadquarters and cheered. A shareholder lawsuitcost him his severance pay and much of hispension.

Agee's behavior so alienated people atMorrison Knudson that when he wasfired as CEO, the employees gathered inthe parking lot of company headquartersand cheered.

Newspaper accounts of Agee's behavior illus-trate many characteristics of the destructive nar-cissism syndrome. They portray the grandiosity,sense of entitlement, lack of values, risk taking,devaluation and abuse of others, need to surroundoneself with sycophants, and inability to toleratepeople more talented than oneself common in de-structively narcissistic people.

Study Two: The Fortune 500 ExecutiveA second story involves a relatively high-level

businessman whom I will call Mark. I came toknow him and the people around him, and to wit-ness their interactions, when I was consulting totheir Fortune 500 company. Mark was loquacious.He spent far more time chatting with people andtalking about himself than he spent actually work-ing. He repeatedly boasted that he was skilled infields besides business and that he had taught at aprestigious institution. He frequently claimed toknow eminent individuals and said that he hadwritten some oi their papers.

Although solicitous to superiors and to peerswho did his work for him, Mark was controllingand constantly critical of subordinates. For exam-ple, he frequently criticized one of his junior man-agers whom I will call Larry, falsely accusing himof failing to hand in deliverables. If Larry tried toexplain what he had and had not done, Mark be-came enraged and stated that he did not want aresponse. On one occasion when Mark asked Larryto download files on various subjects, Larry saidhe thought that some of the work had already beendone. Mark became angry, accusing Larry of sug-gesting that he was stupid.

While outwardly expressing the desire to helpthis new junior manager, Mark had no real concernfor Larry's well-being. For example, without askingpermission, Mark borrowed a key piece of Larry'scomputer equipment and then went out to lunch

132 Academy of Management Executive February

without telling Larry where he could find it. Onseveral occasions, when asked to return borrowedequipment, Mark failed to do so. Particularly strik-ing, after typing late one night for several hourswhile Mark dictated, Larry said that his handswere cramping and he needed a two-minute break.Mark refused to allow it.

Mark was often envious. He complained thatLarry got far more time with their mutual superiorthan junior people normally received, Mark alsocomplained about how close Larry was to this su-perior and said he intended to wean Larry awayfrom him. Angry about being given an office in thebasement, Mark insisted that Larry work there aswell, although there was no desk ior him in thatlocation. When Larry said he could work more ef-ficiently at his own desk, Mark angrily accusedLarry of feeling that he was better than Mark was,since Larry did not want to work in the basement.When Larry needed to stop working with Mark fora day in order to do an assignment for their mutualsuperior, Mark became infuriated, initially refusedto talk to Larry, and threatened to put a damagingnote in his iile.

After a couple oi weeks, Larry told Mark that thecurrent set-up was uncomiortable for him and hethought it would be best if he could move on toanother assignment. Mark complained that Larrywas insulting him. Mark said he treated Larry nodifferently than he treated others and insisted thathe, Mark, was being perfectly appropriate. In fact,Mark did treat other subordinates in a similarlyabusive manner. Eventually, his poor work, partic-ularly his arrogant and insensitive treatment oiclients, caught up with him and he was fired.

This brief snapshot illustrates several typicaltraits of the DN person: the need to be admired,self-glorification, taking credit for the work of oth-ers, repressive control, critical and devaluing be-havior, envy, lack oi empathy, and lack of self-insight.

The Origins of Destructive NarcissismWhat leads to destructive narcissism? Psychody-

namic theory and social learning theory providedifferent explanations. They will be discussed inturn.

Psychodynamic Theories

Psychodynamic theories of behavior focus on theeffects of early childhood experiences on a per-son's psychological make-up, i.e., conscious andunconscious models of the world, psychologicalconflicts, and defense mechanisms. Psychody-

namic theories hold that DN arises from growingup in a house with chronically cold, covertly ag-gressive parents. The primary parenting figurefunctions well on the surface and maintains a su-perficially well-organized home. The primary par-ent, however, is callous and indiiierent to thechild's desires and exhibits nonverbalized, spitefulaggression that injures the child's sense oi seli. Atthe same time, the child possesses some qualitythat others can envy which provides the child witha refuge against feelings of being unloved. Peoplewho grow up in such households frequently rein-force their fragile self-esteem by devaluing othersand behaving in a grandiose way.

The deiense mechanism that dominates thefunctioning of DN individuals is splitting. They seepeople and situations in black-and-white terms,all bad or all good, with no shades of gray. Theirblack-and-white images oi others lead them eitherto idealize or to fear and hate others. Moreover, theperson they idealized yesterday may be devaluedand hated tomorrow. Projection is another oi theirimportant defense mechanisms. To maintain apositive image oi themselves, they project all theirnegative qualities onto others and thereiore de-value others. Since their self-esteem is fragile andcannot handle responsibility for mistakes, theydeny any responsibility ior problems and blameother people.

The defense mechanism that dominatesthe functioning of DN individuals issplitting. They see people and situationsin black-and-white terms, all bad or allgood, with no shades of gray.

Social Learning Theory

Bandura's social learning theory provides an-other explanation ior the development oi destruc-tively narcissistic behavior.' This theory arguesthat much oi our behavior is learned by observingothers. People try out behaviors that they haveseen in others and then reiine these behaviorsbased on the ieedback they receive. Internalizationoi observed behavior is particularly likely if thepersons imitated have high status. Behavior is alsoinfluenced by the inner standards one developsabout appropriate behavior. These standards ariseirom the experience of having limits prescribedduring childhood and by seeing how peers andadults limit their own actions. In other words, ac-cording to social learning theory, people's behav-ior is affected by direct reinforcement (being re-

2002 Lubit 133

warded or punished for a behavior), by vicariousreinforcement (seeing others rewarded or pun-ished ior a given behavior), and by self-imposedstandards.

From the perspective of social learning theory,DN behavior arises when someone sees others getaway with grandiose and self-centered behavior,then also gets away with such behavior. Peoplewith great power or glamour oiten learn to be gran-diose and seli-centered because those aroundthem treat them with great deference, fawn onthem, and do not provide negative feedback whenthey iail to be diplomatic or concerned about theneeds oi others. It has been said that if you havepower, you are probably not as smart, funny, orgood looking as people say you are.

It has been said that if you have power,you are probably not as smart, funny, orgood looking as people say you are.

The Theories ComparedSocial learning theory and psychodynamic the-

ory are meant to be general theories of humanbehavior. Social learning theory, in particular,sees itself as an alternative to psychodynamic ex-planations of personality. In understanding hu-man behavior, psychoanalytic theorists focus theirattention on the individual's inner experience, themeaning given to events, and how one's inner ex-perience is affected by experiences during the firstfew years of life when defense mechanisms de-velop, fixations lay the foundation ior unconsciousconflicts, and internalized object relations develop.

In contrast, social learning theorists focus theirattention on how environmental contingencies (ex-periences of positive and negative reinforcementand observation of others) mold the behavior ofpeople. Despite their focus on vastly different un-derpinnings of behavior, there is no logical reasonthat both cannot hold part of the key to understand-ing human behavior. Both early childhood devel-opmental experiences and the reinforcement of ourbehavior throughout life can lead to the behaviorpattern we recognize as destructive narcissism.Both may be contributing to an individual's DNbehavior.

Destructive Narcissists ComparedFrom simple observation it may be impossible to

differentiate individuals with learned destructivenarcissism from those with psychodynamically

based destructive narcissism. There are, however,important differences. The fragile self-esteem ofindividuals with psychodynamically based narcis-sism leaves them liable to "narcissistic rage"when challenged or criticized. Narcissistic rage ismarked by its high intensity and loss of judgmentin which the individual strikes out in ways that canbe very damaging to self and others. Individualswith learned narcissism do not necessarily havefragile self-esteem and therefore are not as liableto narcissistic rages when challenged. They may,however, not learn to limit their angry outburstssince people have failed to give them negativefeedback. People with psychodynamically basednarcissism will have far less ability to empathizewith others and to observe the problems in theirown behavior than will individuals with learnednarcissism. Moreover, the grandiosity of psychody-namically based narcissistic individuals will bemuch farther out of line with reality than that ofindividuals with learned narcissism. The latterwill lack the more malignant aspects of destructivenarcissism such as paranoia.

The most important difference is that learnednarcissism is not as locked in as psychodynami-cally based narcissism. When confronted with theproblems in their behavior, individuals withlearned narcissism can often make significantchanges. In contrast, individuals with psychody-namically based narcissism are likely to becomeenraged, and perhaps paranoid, when confrontedwith their behavior problems.

How Can Destructively Narcissistic IndividualsRise in Organizations?

Despite their troublesome behavior and weak-nesses in performing their work, DN managers canrise and prosper in firms. Part oi the reason is theirability to cover over their weaknesses with theiroutward self-coniidence, enthusiasm, drive, abilityto charm and manipulate people, glibness, andskill at selling themselves. In addition, their skillat organizational politics, the hesitancy oi manypeople to complain about them to superiors, andtheir ability to restrain their behavior when deal-ing with superiors partially shield them irom thenormal consequences oi their behavior. The mostserious DN behavior is directed at subordinatesand not at the superiors who determine the man-ager's iate. Moreover, subordinates are generallyloath to complain about a DN manager, iearingthat the complaint might reflect badly on them, orthat their DN manager will find out and take re-venge, or that complaining will lower them to theDN manager's level. People also tend to believe

^ I

134 Academy of Management Executive February

that eventually the iniormation will come out andthe manager will self-destruct without their takingsteps to inform superiors about the problems thatthe DN manager creates. Since everyone is hesi-tant to share the negative iniormation, no one per-son realizes how widespread the problem is, so itsextent remains unknown to those with the power todo something about it.

The most poweriul iactors permitting DN manag-ers to survive and even prosper in a company areorganizational ones: the organization's hiring andtransfer practices, culture, performance-measure-ment system, leadership, and work processes.

Hiring and Transfer Practices

Weaknesses in organizational hiring practicespermit DN managers to attain jobs despite havinghad serious problems elsewhere. Leaders makinghiring and promotion decisions often lean heavilyon recommendations from people they know or relyon their impression from an interview, rather thanadequately performing and using backgroundchecks. During interviews, DN managers are likelyto perform particularly well as a result of theiroutward confidence, willingness to distort theirhistory, and glibness that enables them to convinc-ingly claim accomplishments they do not have.Similarly, many DN managers survive and prosperbecause the iniluential contacts who supportedtheir elevation to their present positions continueto support them despite evidence oi problems.Some DN managers survive by transferring fromone position to another and burying their mistakesbefore their bad work catches up with them. Whenpersonal relationships are more important thanobjective performance, organizations will makeproblematic hiring and promotion decisions.

Many DN managers survive and prosperbecause the influential contacts whosupported their elevation to their presentpositions continue to support themdespite evidence of problems.

Even more surprising than the ability oi DN man-agers to survive and rise within a firm is the abilityoi CEOs who brought companies down to get sec-ond and third chances as a result oi their glibness,ability to sell themselves, and a lack oi due dili-gence on the part oi those making hiring deci-sions.^ Frank Lorenzo, after plunging two airlinesinto bankruptcy three times, convinced investors togive him millions oi dollars to start a new airline.

James Baughman, while superintendent of the SanJose Unified School District in California in 1992,admitted to lying about having earned a Ph.D. iromStanford University. He was later found to havestolen money irom student body iunds and spentseveral months in prison. Despite this record, herose to the rank of director oi recruiting at Lucentwhere he served until he died oi a heart attack inSeptember 2000. Al Dunlap, after being fired iromMax Philips and Son in 1973, was hired and lateriired as president of Nitek Paper when the compa-ny's board accused him oi overseeing a large ac-counting fraud. Nitek's chief executive stated thatvirtually all oi the company's senior managementthreatened to resign ii Dunlap remained at Nitek.Despite these serious diificulties, Dunlap was cho-sen to lead Scott Paper and then Sunbeam.

The Organizational Culture

An organization's culture—norms of behavior,values, and beliefs—is forged from the role modelsthat leaders provide, the myths and stories leaderstell, what the organization measures and rewards,the criteria used for hiring and promoting people,and the organization's historical norms of behaviorand values. Some organizational cultures are tol-erant of DN behavior, and some are not. Those nottolerant force DN managers to change or leave.

Performance Measurement and Reward SystemMany organizations focus overwhelmingly on

short-term profits, rather than on a balanced score-card, and pay little or no attention to the humancosts oi how managers achieve financial results. IfDN managers get results, the organization's hier-archy may not measure or even notice their failureto develop subordinates, encourage teamwork,support morale, and treat others well. Many organ-izations either do not have 360-degree feedback ordo not make significant use of it in promotion andcompensation decisions. Rather, making the num-bers and political skill in grabbing credit for short-term profitability or sales increases are rewarded.

The Leadership's Narcissism

The leadership's narcissism will also have aconsiderable impact upon the presence of destruc-tive narcissism at the managerial level. DN lead-ers tend not to care about the well-being of subor-dinates and tolerate DN managers who make thenumbers but do not treat people well. They areparticularly tolerant of DN managers who feedtheir own narcissism with flattery. Also very im-

2002 Lubit 135

portant, the organization's leaders serve as rolemodels that managers emulate. Ii leaders exhibitDN behavior, managers who have DN tendenciesare more likely to act out that behavior.

The Work ProcessesFinally, the organization's work processes aifect

the ability of DN managers to succeed. For exam-ple, DN managers have difficulty prospering inorganizations that use teams extensively, becausetheir teamwork skills tend to be particularly weak.

Destructively Narcissistic Managers andOrganizational Deterioration

The behavior of destructively narcissistic lead-ers creates serious problems for organizations. Thehigher they are in an organization, the more powerand opportunity they have to do harm. Even mid-level DN managers, however, can have seriousharmful effects on morale, development, and reten-tion of employees, and the long-term performanceof their business units.

The behavior of destructively narcissisticleaders creates serious problems fororganizations. The higher they are in anorganization, the more power andopportunity they have to do harm.

DN managers tend to neglect the functional re-quirements of leadership, the needs of others, andusual constraints on the pursuit of self-interest.One of the most destructive attributes oi DN man-agers is their selective neglect oi the needs ofpeople who work for them. They may do nicethings ior others or engage in social pleasantrieswhen it is convenient. But if they dislike a task,such as providing support, responding to ques-tions, dealing with organizational problems, see-ing to it that people have the tools they need tosucceed, or writing performance evaluations, theywon't do it. As a result, the morale oi their subor-dinates ilags, and people in the business unit be-gin to focus their energies on political survival anddealing with their frustration with the DN man-ager, rather than on doing their best work.

DN managers drive the most capable peopleaway. They cannot tolerate the success oi a subor-dinate who threatens to outshine them. Althoughthey may support young colleagues ior a while, intime they are likely to undercut them, especially ifthe colleagues show any signs oi independence.

Interested primarily in increasing their own power,and tending toward authoritarian leadershipstyles, they do not adequately delegate authority.Nor do they want the real interchanges oi ideasneeded for optimal decision-making. Capable jun-ior managers are unlikely to remain in a DN man-ager's department ii they can help it, since theywill not have the opportunities ior decision-making that they want and deserve.

The grandiosity oi DN managers leads them tofocus their attention and energy on increasingtheir own power and prestige, rather than on thework of the organization. In addition, their subor-dinates need to expend considerable energy feed-ing the manager's ego and dealing with the com-plex political situation and frustrations inherent inworking under a DN manager. This massive drainon the energies of the manager and subordinatescan seriously compromise the department's pro-ductivity.

Destructively narcissistic CEOs also tend tomake more than their share of disastrous businessdecisions. They have the power and the inclinationto squander large amounts of company money onextravagances. Seeking glory, they may try tobuild an empire rather than prudently growing acompany. Their need for excitement may leadthem to change course rapidly and to neglect thedetails of plans, causing confusion and poor fol-low-through. Destructively narcissistic CEOs oftenmake destructive decisions because their personalagendas take precedence over the company's bestinterests.

Dealing with Destructively Narcissistic ManagersThe first practical issue for dealing with the

problem oi DN managers is being able to identifythem before they rise to positions of high power.On the way up in the organization, they are notlikely to evidence their full potential ior grandios-ity and lack of respect ior others to their superiors,since they will have some internal inhibitionsagainst acting grandiosely and only limited powerto do so. Nevertheless, there are oiten significantwarning signs. They include:

• devaluing and exploiting others,• lack of concern for the needs of subordinates

unless convenient,• trying to take all credit for success,• undermining competitors for promotion,• excessively criticizing others,• scapegoating,• excessive self-promotion and attention-seeking

behavior.

136 Academy of Management Executive February

• seeing all events in terms of significance to theirown careers,

• being highly defensive when criticized,• harboring unfounded beliefs that others want to

hurt them,• currying iavor with superiors while iailing to

support and develop those below them.

One of the best tools for early recognition oi DNmanagers is 360-degree ieedback, since they areunlikely to contain their problematic behaviorswhen dealing with subordinates and colleagues. Apotential diiiiculty is that subordinates may fail togive accurate assessments, out of fear that theirnegative comments about a manager will get backto the manager, be traced to them, and lead toretaliation. Therefore, 360-degree feedback needsto be a regular part of the organization's routine,with all people expected to provide anonymous,confidential feedback on superiors. For problem-atic managers to change, however, the content ofsubordinate concerns must be transmitted to them.To get around this conflict, one can make it clear toemployees that negative comments about theirmanager will not be forwarded unless the con-cerns are widespread and unless the negativefeedback can be given in a way that protects theanonymity of the people who provided it. In addi-tion to supporting the use of 360-degree feedback,executives should foster an organization in whichcommunication across multiple levels of the hier-archy is supported.

One of the best tools for early recognitionof DN managers is 360-degree feedback.

How a company can best deal with a DN man-ager depends upon how destructive the narcissis-tic behavior is to the organization, what redeemingtalent the DN manager has, and the likelihood thatthe person can change. Some self-aggrandizementand desire for attention can be a small price to payior a dynamic, insightful, effective problem solverwho knows the business.

If a DN manager is replaceable, without criticalknowledge or contacts, then confronting the be-havior in hopes of ameliorating it is a good placeto begin. If the manager's DN is primarily of thelearned variety, confrontation and executivecoaching are usually helpful. Conirontation caneven ameliorate moderate psychodynamicallybased narcissism by strongly reminding DN man-agers that they are subordinate to others. Ii thedestructive narcissism is severe and based on psy-chodynamic problems and fragile self-esteem.

however, confrontation may lead to rage and para-noia and make matters worse. These individualsmay be helped to function better by providing themwith copious emotional support from consultantsand superiors, to reinforce their fragile self-esteem. In the graphic terms of self-psychology,the consultant becomes a mirroring object. Askilled executive coach providing a combination ofempathic support and training in how to work withothers can help a DN manager contain some of themost damaging manifestations oi DN.

Managers and executives can oiten be helped tobe more open to confrontation and change if theiranxiety and depression are treated. These statesdecrease self-esteem, thereby increasing vulnera-bility to stress and ultimately increasing the ri-gidity of the DN manager's problematic personal-ity traits. Treating their depression and anxietywith appropriate medication and cognitive behav-ioral therapy can help them to be less defensive,more responsive to others, and better able to lookat their problematic behaviors and to makeprogress in therapy or executive coaching.

The management of an executive with destruc-tive narcissism can be very challenging. The situ-ation becomes particularly complicated when theexecutive is difficult to replace in the near future,since confrontation oi the behavior in the hope oiameliorating it can precipitate a crisis and becounterproductive. Calling in a consultant skilledin dealing with problems of narcissism, and whocan provide a complex mix oi confrontation, coach-ing and support, can significantly ameliorate thesituation.

Coping with Destructively Narcissistic BossesWorking for, or with, destructively narcissistic

people brings considerable stress. Their devalua-tion, exploitation, arrogance, criticism, micro-management, and failure to fulfill their responsi-bilities to you are inherently very stressful.Nevertheless, your attitude and actions can signif-icantly affect your stress level when dealing withsuch people. Attempts to change their behaviortoward you, by standard methods such as tellingthem how their behavior makes you feel, will notwork. In general, trying to change the behavior ofDN individuals will primarily lead to irustration. Itis best to accept that they were so damaged intheir emotional development that they lack theability to empathize and behave reasonably. Keep-ing this in mind will help you avoid taking theircriticism personally or arguing with them about it.Disagreeing with their critical statements will onlyenrage them.

2002 Lubit 137

There are other things you can do to avoid prob-lematic situations. One is to pay attention to thosethings that lead to problems and avoid them whenpossible. Avoid gossiping with DN managers, bor-rowing from them, or lending to them. It makes youvulnerable. Try to obtain written directions when-ever possible, since they decrease the room foruncertainty and complaint about you. Documentyour work so you can defend yourself if they criti-cize you for failing to do your job properly. Docu-ment interactions and the course oi events so thatif you need to defend yourself to someone higherup, you have the means to do so.

Moving to another position within the companyin order to avoid the DN manager is generally thebest long-term strategy. This is particularly impor-tant for very capable individuals, whom a DN man-ager will see as a threat and will therefore try toundercut. Once you are out oi their unit, report tosuperiors how they treat people. Ii possible, do thisin collaboration with others who can validate yourstatements. Iniorming superiors of the problemwill help the company as a whole and improve theworking environment for all.

Moving to another position -within thecompany in order to avoid the DNmanager is generally the best long-termstrategy.

It was noted earlier that confrontation can some-times work with individuals with learned DN. Thisconfrontation, however, needs to come irom above,or possibly from a peer, not from below. If subor-dinates attempt to confront superiors about theirbehavior, whether their DN is mostly learned ormostly psychodynamic, the reaction will generallybe anger and retaliation. It is safest for subordi-nates to behave in an admiring manner, whichtends to decrease tensions.

Dealing with Destructively Narcissistic PeersWorking with destructively narcissistic peers is

also difficult. They take credit for your work, dis-parage you to others, incessantly boast, lie, andmislead people often for no other reason than theperverse pleasure of being able to deceive. Theyalso act as if they know the best way to do every-thing, discount others' input, do not respect bound-aries (enter your office and borrow things withoutpermission), expect favors but rarely do any inreturn, and give you instructions as if they wereyour boss.3

These behaviors are serious problems. There areno perfect solutions, only courses of action that donot make things worse and are better than doingnothing. If they make disparaging remarks aboutyou, simply state that you do not agree with thecriticism. Avoid getting into arguments or retalia-tory attacks. They can make you look bad to othersand provoke the destructively narcissistic personto launch further attacks. To avoid having creditfor your work stolen, avoid sharing ideas with DNindividuals until after you have told your supervi-sor and team of your ideas in writing. When askedfor ideas, respond in writing with your name at-tached. Boasting is best handled by ignoring it. Donot ask a DN person for favors, and do not borrowor lend anything. If given orders by a destructivelynarcissistic colleague, either ignore them or writeto your boss to ask for clarification on responsibil-ities. Meet boundary violations with clear, consis-tent statements about what you do not want thisindividual to do.

Organizations and Destructively NarcissisticManagers: Some Final Questions

Destructively narcissistic executives and man-agers are a significant problem for organizations.Their behavior is in stark contrast to what produc-tive workplaces need. They damage the morale ofsubordinates, undercut their motivation, diverttheir energies from useful tasks, and drive awaythe most talented workers. If they rise to the CEO'soffice, they can lead an organization into disaster.

This article presents some steps that organiza-tions and employees can take to decrease the neg-ative impact of DN managers. Most important isbeing aware of the problem and its symptoms.Armed with this understanding, organizations canconfront DN managers about their behavior andthen either arrange for coaching or remove them.

Organizations also need to question the ele-ments of their culture and procedures that tolerateor even celebrate destructive narcissism. Does theculture support or inhibit DN? Is 360-degree feed-back used and analyzed in promotion decisions?Do leaders reach down into the organization to findout what is happening throughout the company?Are managers measured primarily on short-termprofits, rather than on a balanced scorecard in-cluding how well they develop subordinates andcooperate with others? What role model does se-nior management provide? Are high levels of con-fidence, to the point of grandiosity, equated withcompetence? Are superiors automatically believedover subordinates?

We also need to be aware of our own vulnera-

138 Academy of Management Executive February

bility to letting ourselves fall into learned DN be-havior. Most of us could do so if given power,placed under great pressure, and denied feedbackfrom subordinates. If we do not pay attention tothis potential in ourselves, we may inadvertentlybehave in damaging ways. If we are vigilant aboutour own behavior, provide a good role model forothers to follow, foster an organizational cultureopposed to destructively narcissistic behavior, andrespond appropriately to abuses that others com-mit, we can make major strides in improving theproductivity and well-being of people in our organ-ization.

Endnotes' Kernberg, O. 1998. Ideology, conflict and leadership in

groups and oiganizations. New Haven: Yale University Press;Kohut, H. 1971. The analysis oi the self. New York: IniernationalUniversities Press.

^ Kets de Vries, M. 1993. Leaders, lools and irnposters. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

^ The term destructive narcissism comes irom Brown, N. 1998.The destructive narcissistic pattern. Westport: Praeger.

''Kernberg, O. 1975. Borderiine conditions and pathologicalnarcissism. New York: Jason Aronson; Kernberg, O. 1985. Bolder-line conditions and pathological narcissism. Northvale: JasonAronson. Kernberg, O. 1986. Factors in the psychoanalytic treat-ment of narcissistic personalities. In A. Morrison (Ed.), EssentiaJpapers on narcissism. Hew York: NYU Press; Kernberg, O. 1986.Further contributions to the treatment of narcissistic personal-ities. In A. Morrison, op. cit.; Kohut, H., op. cit.; Kohut, H., & Wolf,E. 1978. The disorders of the self and their treatment: An outline.The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 59: 413-426.

^ Buckingham. M., & Coffman, C. 1999. First, break all therules. New York: Simon & Schuster.

^ Information on the career of Mr. Agee, as described in thetext, comes Irom the following sources: O'Reilly, B. Agee inexile. Fortune, 29 May 1995, 50-61; Hopkins, J. Morrison Knudsen

fires ils extravagant CEO. USA Today. 13 February 1995, 2B;Groves, M. The corporate hero derailed. LA Times, 3 February1995, Dl; Chie! exec gets red carpet as his company bleeds redink. Denver Rocky Mountain News. 26 March 1995. 1G2A; Rigdon,J., & Lublin, ]. Management: Oail to duty: Why Morrison boardfired Agee. Wall Street Journal. 13 February 1995, Bl; Feder, B.Agee leaving Morrison Knudsen. New Yoik Times. 2 February1995, Dl; Groves, M., 8E Sanchez, J. Morrison Knudsen chief Ageeiorced to step down. IJOS Angeles Times. H February 1995, Dl;Hopkins, J. Ex-CEO surrounded himself with security. USA To-day, 21 February 1995; Rigdon, J. William Agee will leave Mor-rison Knudsen. Wall Street Journal. 2 February 1995, Bl; Hen-riques, D. A celebrity boss faces exile from 2nd corporatekingdom. New Yoik Times. 10 February 1995, Al; and MorrisonKnudsen agrees to settle shareholder suits. New Yotk Times, 21September 1995, D4., 'Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory. Englewood Glifis:

Prentice-Hall.^ Bennett, A., 8f Lublin, J. Teflon big shots: Failure doesn't

always damage the careers of top executives. Walt Street Jour-nal 31 March 1995. Romero, S., with Atlas, R. Lucent investigatesrecord of former high-ranking executive. New York Times, 21February 2001, Cl; Norris, F. 2001. An executive's missing years:papering over past problems. New York Times. 16 July 2001, 1.

^ Brown, N., op. cit.

Roy Lubit, MD, Ph.D., is an execu-tive coach, business consultant,and psychiatrist in Manhattan. Hereceived his Ph.D. in political sci-ence at Harvard. He has consultedto CEOs, taught managerial andleadership skills to MBA students,and designed manager trainingprograms. He has written on or-ganizational design, knowledgemanagement, stress manage-ment, scopegoating, and dealingwith difficult managers andemployees. Contact: roylubit@adiglobal.com.