3 toxic traits that we confuse with good leadership behaviour!

Being a leader is scary stuff. 

You're the one that sets out to make a difference... 

You show them how it’s done...

You are where the buck stops...

...and other such assorted cliches that leaders like to tell themselves as they self-importantly tweak their imaginary ties and stride off into the proverbial sunset. 

Is being a leader that hard? 

Being a leader is scary stuff, I agree but it’s not rocket science. It’s just as hard or as easy as being a good finance manager or a good sales person or a good product manager. It’s essentially about exhibiting a certain set of skills needed to get a group of people to achieve a certain goal, within a certain budget and a certain time frame.

But unlike the other roles that I’ve mentioned, a leader’s sphere of influence is generally much larger and accordingly the destruction that they can wreak is much higher in volume. And while their good traits can positively influence more people, their toxic traits can conversely destroy more careers and also have a ripple effect by teaching bad leadership skills down the line! 

In my twenty plus years of work experience in the corporate and startup space, I have had the privilege (and the pain) to have been on the team of some extraordinarily good and some terribly bad leaders. And - focusing as always on the bad first - here are the 3 most toxic traits that I have seen confused with good leadership behaviours! 

A for Aggression

Workplaces are factories, not battlefields. But somehow we haven’t been break past the terrible, terrible analogy of a leader being akin to a general on a battlefield commanding his troops against the enemy! 

There is NO enemy. 

There is NO war. 

There are NO troops. 

And you are NO General. 

And yet the cliche lives on. 

And we consistently elevate to leadership positions people we wouldn’t trust to resolve a dispute between toddlers. 

If leadership is about enabling a team to achieve a common goal, then the chief skill a leader needs to bring to the table is an ability to foster respectful collaboration. 

And not an ability to start a brawl. 

Yet you will consistently see the most aggressive, the most egoistic team members being elevated to leadership positions, while the sensible, empathetic collaborative types are relegated to the sidelines, sadly shaking their heads and resolving to passive-aggressively show their disappointment with the management’s decision. 

Perhaps the answer lies in the perceived emulation of success. Most aggressive people have demonstrated successful in their solo roles and in a live demonstration of Peter’s Principle, rise to the level of their incompetence! And become leaders. 

V for Volatility 

We have all worked with that one leader who’s a powder keg waiting to go off! I had one boss like that too. We would peek over the edge of her cubicle to judge her mood before appearing within hurling distance. 

Volatility is exhausting!

Teams are constantly judging moods and changing their stands on issues and ideas on the fly to ensure that they toe the leader’s line and don’t come in the line of fire. Good ideas are suppressed because teams don’t know they will be received in meetings and no one wants to be today’s whipping boy! And Yes men abound because the No men leave. While the Maybe men look for jobs. 

And too depressingly often, this volatility and unpredictable behaviour is a cultivated tactic by the leader so that teams don’t find them predictable, get comfortable with them and start taking them for granted. But it’s a tactic that backfires big time, because a team that doesn’t trust you to have their backs will never give you their best!

F for Fire! 

This is now on fire, team! 

This is now top-priority, guys! 

This needs to be done today, people! 

Building pressure and urgency in the workplace around the achievement of an important goal, is what leaders sometimes have to do! But creating a constant sense of urgency is actually a pressure tactic that is endemic to toxic workplaces and toxic leadership styles. 

A constant fire situation at work is indicative of a workplace or leadership culture that believes that people generally are lazy and entitled and left to themselves, will relax and become completely unproductive. And therefore the need for and artificial sense of pressure all the time to keep them productive and at the top of their game. 

No one is at the top of their game all the time.

It’s not physically or mentally possible.

And all these constant on-fire situations achieve is to burn out people. And make them disbelieving of truly urgent situations. If you cry wolf all the time...?

All in all, leadership is scary stuff but it doesn’t have to be. It can be as simple as being an empathetic team mate, a kind person and a good friend. 

If only we would let it remain that simple. 

Do you agree? Let me know in the comments!

Or visit me at www.ritu.io