A few weeks ago I was in a meeting with a Brigadier and I mentioned toxicity. They held me to account for my use of the word, and I went on to explain how the few can have such a drastic effect on the many and that this was a main factor as to why toxicity gets brought up so readily. We all know what it’s like to work with or for a toxic leader, and their trail of destruction can be profound.
It reminded me of a Twitter thread I wrote a while ago. Below you’ll see those thoughts, repurposed and edited for your reading pleasure (or displeasure, depending on how you experience your workplace!).
We need toxic leaders. But, why exactly?
I was once, not too long ago, warned that I’m too friendly with my team. And this frustrated me somewhat. What, exactly, is ‘wrong’ with having a pleasant relationship with those I lead?
People aren’t robots.
Quality leaders don’t have an issue being personable with team members, they see civility as a performance enhancer within organisations. There is, however, plenty to be learned from narrow-minded and shortsighted comments that undermine respectful, courteous, and polite approaches to leading.
Yes, we absolutely do need to be able to switch on violence in certain military contexts. Consider it akin to stepping into a boxing ring; prior to that moment we aren’t in violent-mode. If a pro boxer had their ‘fight’ mindset in place 24 hours a day they wouldn’t be able to function as a normal human being. They turn violence on and off when it is appropriate. So must soldiers.
It got me thinking; tough should not equal toxic. I can’t help but think it is backwards to warn a leader who is welcoming and—dare I say—friendly to their people.
Having said that, and do bear with me on this: toxicity is essential in most large organisations. Here are five reasons why:
Reason one: We learn a LOT from them.
Quality leaders use toxic leaders as a template... of how NOT to lead. And by simply not doing the things they do, non-toxic leaders are better than them. Leaders don't even have to be 'good' to be more sustainable and effective, in the long term, than toxic leaders. And they don’t leave a trail of destruction behind them as they go.
Treating people poorly, being 'robust' because toxic leaders tell themselves that 'we do a dangerous job', so it's 'in their interest'... is quite the fallacy and good people know it. More so, it's far more challenging to lead to inspire, nurturing genuine commitment, than it is to demand and force action.
People who think intimidation and fear is the way to lead, especially with our youngest generation: it's a total myth. Intimidation and fear, while the easiest go-to for many military leaders, needn't be the default.
Toxic leaders make this plain to see, to practically everybody around them, and non-toxic leaders learn in abundance because of them.
Reason Two: They’re easily proven wrong.
You may remember when people used to accuse the 'PlayStation Generation' of having soft feet and being a waste of space? They (we) went to Iraq and Afghanistan and proved themselves beyond measure.
We’re now seeing ‘woke’ and ‘snowflake’ being used against modern and progressive leaders…
Toxic leaders who believe that driving people into the ground is somehow making them bulletproof, strong, and robust killing machines are only fooling themselves. We are far more lethal now, when it matters, because we have the strength of the whole team behind us (who commit themselves far more readily and wholly to decent people).
As time goes on, this will continue to prove itself repeatedly until those accusations, hot air as they are, whimper out.
Reason Three: They enhance people’s resilience.
Another benefit of the short-sighted and detrimental approach to toxic 'leading' is that they enhance people’s coping skills. People become more resilient because of the horrendous behaviour they’re exposed to, they learn how to adapt and how to bounce back until the toxic leader moves on (yes, they also quit too - but many stick it out and find ways to ride the storm).
Those shockwaves that hurt people? They are lessons that we can learn from.
Reason Four: They enhance Followership behaviours.
Being toxic facilitates a lead by example moment too. Hear me out. Many people strive and work with discretionary effort because they are committed to their organisations. They show others how to do so in the face of toxicity when it is present. They keep going because they have a job to do.
Quality leaders behave in a way that demonstrates to their own subordinates how to follow a toxic boss. So, there's another benefit… thanks? No, not really (more on this below).
Reason Five: They raise morale. Kind of.
Another benefit of toxicity is that people LOVE to see them falter and/or fail, when that happens word spreads FAST and morale gets a boost to rapturous rounds of metaphoric applause.
Watching a toxic leader suffer a cataclysmic failure in the professional context offers a blissful schadenfreude moment. As with reason four, there are strings attached. More to follow.
So... thanks toxic leaders? Not exactly.
While people are coping with toxicity and bouncing back from rock bottom at times and learning important lessons - they're not progressing. Not stimulated. Not challenging the system. Not confident. Not feeling their worth. And looking at the exit sign.
Also, leading by example in the face of toxicity does indeed show high-end followership. But does it really? A good follower should be a courageous follower - telling the leader how it is. The issue is, toxicity silences the whole truth. So it inhibits trust and heavily stifles challenge. Another pseudo-benefit. Sorry.
Furthermore, on schadenfreude: that's a tale in itself. What sort of organisational climate is that to be a part of? When the many want to see the few fall? Not one that I’d want to be anywhere near. How is that in any way ok?
Final thoughts
Toxic leaders bring us organisational benefits, when we look carefully enough, and we can channel these lessons to good effect. But the strings attached are pretty awful and I’d so much rather write a different blog on how to rid organisations from toxicity altogether.
The issue is, we’ll likely not be able to get rid of this behaviour from any organisation because people are people. There will always be a spectrum, from good to toxic.
Feature photo by Pablo Stanic on Unsplash
Comments