RISE OF TOXIC LEADERSHIP

Leaders don’t make followers, they make many more leaders — this was the famous refrain of Tom Peters, the author of many a bestselling books on management. But see what is happening. Leaders are talking just the opposite. In fact, a parallel can be drawn with the story of Demon King Hiranyakashyap, the father of Prahalad. He considered himself to be greater than the Lord himself. He wanted people to chant his name instead of Vishnu’s. It was this that led to his nemesis as he was slain by Narsimha, an incarnation of Vishnu. The moral of the story need not be debated as it is quite obvious.

What needs to be understood is that this new phenomenon of toxic leadership is becoming a matter of concern for management researchers. Also called the dark side of leadership, the idea has drawn considerable attention. Toxic leadership is a combination of self-centred attitudes tempered by self-aggrandisement and narcissism. Such leaders act whimsically under the mistaken belief that they can do no wrong. Stating that toxic leadership would lead to serious problems for the organisation, the employees and the other stakeholders are labouring the obvious as enough historical evidences are there. The stories of Hiranyakashyap to Ravana to Kansa from the Hindu scriptures and that of Nero and Nebuchadnezzar in the ancient Roman and Greek literature provide enough evidence. But that is besides the point. The issue is why this resurgence in toxic leadership?

Researchers are not able to find the clues and their studies only grapple with the attributes of such leaders. Offering definitions, and there are many of them, is hardly of any help unless the malady is addressed. The question that needs to be answered is what intoxicates people? Power may be one of the reasons as it inebriates to the point of self-destruction. But why does this not happen to all leaders?

Humility, considered a key managerial value these days, may be a reason. It provides strength of the leader’s character. Rightly had Abraham Lincoln said that if you want to test a man’s character, give him power. Power will inebriate only those who get swayed by it. Those who can take power in their stride may, in fact, become more humble. This is one of the qualities of saints. They can assimilate power.

What are the other reasons for this maddening effect of power? The organisation itself, which contains toxins like absence of transparency and objectivity. The organisations that distribute largesse to those kowtowing to seats of power often get toxic leaders. It is thus the organisational culture and systems that are greater determinants of toxic leadership. Quality and character of followers are certainly important because the more gullible and self-centered the followers, the more whimsical and toxic will be the leadership. Toxic leaders exhibit deviant workplace behaviour that violates established norms and have adverse effects on both the organisation and the members. It is for such organisation that the phrase, ‘you tell me the person, I will tell you the rule, applies’.

A central personality trait of toxic leaders is destructive narcissism. They are not interested in mentoring and developing second-line leaders and always reward yes men at the cost of right men. Toxic leadership is a new trend that is discernible these days and one reason is the decline of values at the cost of self-interest.

THE SEARCH FOR HAPPINESS

On January 10, the President of India addressed the students and faculty of all IITs, NITs, Central Universities and a few other elite institutions of higher learning on the theme ‘Building a Humane and Happy Society’. The address in the video conferencing mode raised some very relevant concerns as far as our country is concerned and may well be crucial for the Republic that will turn 67 this January. The crux of the address was on creating a happy society and he had some very cogent reasons for the subject he chose to speak on.

In these over six and a half decades, our population rose from 360 million to 1.25 billion, our annual per capita income rose from Rs7,500 to Rs77,000, our GDP rose from two per cent to more than six per cent. Further, our food gain production rose to 222 million tonnes from a measly 45 million tonnes, and we are today among the world’s fastest growing economies. So far so good. Yet, in the World Happiness Report 2015, India figured at the rank 117 among 158 nations.

This, then, indicates that something is amiss somewhere. More so, because we have been a civilisation that has a tradition of festivals and celebrations. Our philosophy has been based on the premise‘Sarve Bhavantu Sukhinah’ or peace and happiness to all.

The President’s concerns were genuine and if he directed his address to the elite centres of higher learning, he must have had a reason. Apparently that reason could be to make the elite institutions take up the challenge of creating a humane and happy society. It is against this backdrop that there is need to ponder over the entire gamut of issues. Ever since the then king of Bhutan raised the idea of happiness as a better measure of well-being than the cold statistical data related to Gross Domestic Product and Per Capita Income, the concept of measuring happiness has caught up with the world fraternity.

For the past few years, the World Happiness Report is now being published annually and evaluates nations on a happiness scale that is based on a survey of the state of global happiness. It is used to assess the progress of nations on the basis of measurement of well-being. The happiness report reflects a new worldwide demand for greater attention to happiness as a criteria for Government policy. Happiness and subjective well-being are, in fact, better indicators of the quality of human development.

With every passing year, the refinements about the concept of happiness and well-being give new insights into how to make the world a better place to live in. It is now being realised that happiness provides a better indicator of human welfare than do income, poverty, education, health, and good Government. People are happier living in societies where there is less inequality of happiness.

Incidentally, over the years, happiness inequality has increased significantly and this is a disturbing trend. The question that should be asked is why is this so? Despite other indicators of prosperity showing a rising trend, why the outcome is not happy. Perhaps the President wants the elite institutions to find an answer to this. What is the path to happiness and what role can the institutions play in this? There is a need for all of us to think about this.

PROMOTING WORKPLACE INCLUSION

With increasing mobility and search for better opportunities, society is witnessing a change that is unprecedented. One major influence has been that of management and technical education that has transformed the workforce dramatically. A visit to any workplace will bear witness to the sea change that has been brought about. A typical workplace today is a socio-cultural mosaic in which the workforce is a highly diverse mix of religious and cultural groups. It is rather commonplace to find a shop floor with manager of one religion coming from one region of the country leading a workforce of several different religions coming from different regions. Not that it was not so in the past. Only the incidence has risen tremendously, so if the past was an exception, the present is the norm.

With persons of different religious and cultural identities working under one roof, organisations and managements find themselves on a sticky wicket as they feel the need to convert the workplace into a melting pot. This, however, is easier said than done. The responsibility of the management, especially, the CEO has therefore increased as he/she has to ensure that the diverse groups do not feel excluded. Imagine a workplace in a remote corner of a country dominated by a particular religio-cultural cohort with several small groups of different religious and cultural backgrounds. And imagine the feelings of such groups who may find themselves as odd minority groups who are not able to gel with the majority culturally and socially.

Fortunately, workplace legislations have evolved to a great extent with laws being enacted to ensure fairness in ostensibly all matters of technical and regulatory aspects. But what about the psychological inclusion, which is so very important to ensure that the minority groups do not feel alienated as this alienation may, rather will, lead to indifferent attitudes, ultimately affecting the quality of both performance and workplace relationships? It is this issue that has become a major concern for CEOs and top managements, particularly organisations where employee strength is large and highly diverse. Especially the PSUs where the corporate management is under Government mandate to be objectively fair.

While many strategies can be formulated by the human resource management departments to bring about, rather promote, workplace inclusion, the role of the top leadership, particularly the CEO, is crucial. It is the initiative from the top that makes all the difference. A case in point is the PSU Neyveli Lignite Corporation (NLC) in Tamil Nadu. A corporation under the Central PSUs, NLC has a large workforce comprising religious, linguistic, and culturally different cohorts. Dr SK Acharya, the present CEO, is a hardcore HR man and has worked out an innovative way to ensure workplace inclusion of the culturally diverse groups. Though he has not been there for long, his grooming in human psychology enables him to take a decision that is proving enriching. Earlier, each cultural group would celebrate its festivals in its own way. The present CEO has made the different religious and cultural festivals a company affair and the NLC management celebrates 14 different festivals for different groups. The expenses are borne out of the funds earmarked for these occasions, which Dr Acharya believes is a small investment to ensure workplace inclusion and create universal brotherhood. This facilitates social camaraderie and strengthens national integration. This can be emulated.

COGITO ERGO SUM

These are the times of unreason. Look at what is happening around. Read what is being written. Hear what is being told. From newspapers to news channels, all are talking in a language that is taxing the reason. From research findings to statistical data to economic theories to political ideology, there is chaotic information all around. That people are thriving on this chaos is a different story altogether, but the fact that chaos rules cannot be denied.

Is there a way out? Not sure, but recapitulating the ideas of French philosopher Rene Descartes, also called the father of modern Western philosophy, may well do a lot of good. At least it may give a satisfaction that one is not taken for a ride. Quoting the essence of Cartesian logic then it boils down to just three words ‘Cogito ergo sum’, the Latin philosophical proposition of Descartes that in English means ‘I think, therefore I am’.

Alas thinking is a major casualty of the present times; we may call it by whatever name we like. So for some it could be the post-modern society, for others, it can be the information age, while some may choose to call this era the knowledge era. But the fact that thinking as a human attribute is facing extinction can hardly be denied.

Thinking then has to be restored and the mind activated by the spirit of enquiry. This is the reason why according to many the greatest virtue of the Cartesian logic is doubt or questioning. The focus of the philosophy of Descartes is on the enquiring mind. This enquiring mind uses intrusion, which Descartes suggests is the ability to use the pure light of the mind as opposed to the evidence of the senses or of the imagination.

Descartes advocates that to understand any problem, there is a need to embrace intuition that may clear all doubts. This has to be followed by the analysis that would help decompose complex problems into simplest possible units. Thereafter, you need to synthesise to reach the truth that has been reached by the two preceding steps. Putting these in order, which is starting with the simplest, reached at by intuition, to the more complex ones deduced from these. And finally there is need to apply deductive reasoning to find the link between the intuition and the ultimate consequences.

Descartes suggests that we need to reject everything of which we have the slightest cause to doubt as false so as to find out if anything remained that could be called indubitable. He was right because our senses often deceive us and we often make mistakes in reasoning even on simple matters. For Descartes, human existence was only as a thinking being.

Amid the chaos prevailing today, Descartes’ ideas certainly provide the right clues for understanding the truth which ordinarily is judged by information. So the next time you see an advertisement claiming something that does not appeal to reason, doubt it and question the veracity of the claim. A celebrity endorsing a product with extraordinary attributes — doubt it. A politician promising the sky — doubt it. Remember, you doubt therefore you exist. The golden truth is, in the words of author Agatha Christie’s legendry detective Hercule Poirot, “It is the brain, the little grey cells, on which one must rely.” One must seek the truth within, not without. So think before accepting anything as the gospel truth.

FORGIVE THEM O’LORD

In our junior classes we had a period on scriptures in which Bible History as a subject was also taught. The Old Testament, The New Testament, and the stories of life of Jesus Christ especially the parables were truly inspiring as they all carried useful lessons. The Miracles of Jesus Christ, his sermons and above all his humility had a great impact on our minds. But what was the greatest of all his lessons were his famous last words while he was on the crucifix. True, the significance of those words were too big for a child of a junior class to understand. How could one ask God to forgive those who are very cruelly crucifying somebody who has done no wrong? Even the persons who passed the sentence of crucifixion knew and acknowledged that Jesus had done no wrong. And lo, this man is saying, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”. But it was only after a few decades that the significance of those famous last words, their import came to strike my mind. It was a chance incident that gave me this realisation.

It so happened that I was going to some place for an official work. The car driven by a chauffeur was negotiating a rural terrain. The time was some time around Holi and it was morning. As the car slowed down at a bend on the road a small kid who was just standing on the side picked up a handful of mud and simply banged it on the car I was travelling in. The enraged driver stopped the car and was preparing to chase the boy who was smiling innocently. But with no apparent damage to the body of the car I intervened asking the driver to forget and continue the journey. And in a flash I could realise what Christ meant. The boy did what he did for simply pleasure. He enjoyed that hitting of the body of the car with the mud ball he had created. He rejoiced and for him it was not wrong, neither morally nor legally to bang the car. This was what Christ wanted to convey. It, of course, requires a kind of Christ like greatness to pray for forgiveness of those who were trying to kill him so cruelly. For us lesser mortals it may not always be possible but still we should try to learn some lessons from the great souls who come to this world to show us the light.

Greatness certainly may not be possible for everybody but goodness is surely attainable. There have been people who have proved that goodness can lead to greatness if only we learn from their lives, their deeds. The world has seen many rulers, kings and emperors who have derived their power from sheer coercive force, but there also have been people who have acquired their power out of love and compassion. From Mahavira and Buddha to more recently Gandhi and Martin Luther king, all have proved that niceties also rule and rule for a much longer period. Nice guys, then, do not always finish second. Power has many connotations and defining it has always been a difficult job for social scientists, but its impact has not been as difficult to understand. The over ambitious leaders have always tried to win others whereas the great leaders have won themselves first. The others simply followed suit.