The lure of dark traits at work
Your organisation, like any other, could have pockets of toxicity! The cost of toxic behaviour is so harmful that it often eclipses the great work being done in an organisation. In fact, the costs saved by avoiding toxic employees outweigh the profits made by rockstar employees. (Housman and Manor, 2015)
It is crucial to encourage acceptance of different behaviours, but it's also essential to be cautious of toxic behaviour to avoid the development of toxic environments that can harm the organization. Even small amounts of toxic behaviour can result in significant costs for an organization, such as losing customers, decreasing employee morale, increasing turnover, and losing credibility with important external stakeholders. Dark traits exhibited by certain individuals or teams, continually or under the pressures of the environment, could give rise to such toxicity!
It is unclear why the behaviours outlined in this article are called dark traits. Considering that this phrase may carry discriminatory overtones, we recommend that business and academic communities discourage the use of such terms. However, for the sake of brevity and convenience, this term has still been used in this article. We apologise for any offence caused by this!
Many studies on dark personality focus on either the Dark Triad, which includes Machiavellianism, Narcissism, and Psychopathy (Paulhus & Williams, 2002), or models of dark traits based on DSM-IV Axis II disorders (Hogan & Hogan, 2001; 2009). Paulhus and Williams (2002) identify dark traits as pathologies that involve elevating oneself at the expense of others, while Hogan and Hogan (2001) view the dark side as negative characteristics that emerge when individuals lower their guard.
The Dark Triad’s trio of Machiavellianism, Narcissism, and Psychopathy is characterised by callously disregarding others, seeking pleasure from manipulating others, overvaluing oneself at the expense of devaluing others, lacking empathy and restraint and engaging in reckless behaviour. Some researchers view these three traits as separate but with shared features, while others speculate that their similarities imply an underlying personality construct that has not yet been fully understood. Interestingly, charisma is a common, alluring byproduct.
Hogan Development Scale (HDS), is a widely regarded personality questionnaire that uses 11 scales and 33 subscales. Extreme scores on each of the scales indicate the presence of behaviour that could be problematic under specific circumstances. For example, employees extremely high in Dutifulness are indecisive sycophants while those who are low in Dutifulness eventually end up resenting authority. Similarly, those who display too much Diligence may be inclined to micro-manage while those who display too little may have poor attention to detail and tend to over-delegate.
Unsurprisingly, these traits when left unchecked, may take malignant forms. This may lead to suboptimal performance and even institutional failures. While some of these malignancies may lead to potential short-term advantages, they could lead to problems over the long term. (Hogan, 2007; Hogan & Hogan, 2009; Hogan & Kaiser, 2005). For example, individuals who display traits like Machiavellianism are less likely to display organisational citizenship behaviours (OCBs). It's possible that their superiors and colleagues may not even realize their disregard for responsibility, dedication, and adherence. Such people may be effective at impression management but they are unable to be concerned by the organisations they work for and the people they work with (Becker & O’Hair, 2007)
Malignant manifestations of these traits can deceive teams into dismissing problems brimming beneath the surface. These traits are often linked to charismatic behaviours that can lead to deception. The short-term productivity boost associated with these traits could also be a major reason that teams and organisations continue to ignore these traits till they lead to (or threaten to lead to) a significant loss of organisational reputation and trust. Think Theranos and Enron!
Take Narcissists, for example. Others may mistake their enthusiasm for the creativity of their ideas. While extreme narcissists may claim to be very creative, their creativity may not be any better than others. Within groups, optimal levels of creativity are reached when group members display only moderate levels of narcissism (Goncalo, Flynn, & Kim, 2010). Additionally, toxic leadership behaviours cause stress among employees, decrease their sense of empowerment and decrease creativity at work.
A lot of traditional business research recommends avoiding dark traits by not hiring individuals who are likely to exhibit such traits. While this sounds straightforward, it is an extremely flawed approach. Like many other phenomena in nature, behavioural traits like narcissism also exist on a spectrum. At one end of the spectrum, we may see benign manifestations, that can even be useful, and could simply manifest in the form of attention to detail, insisting on the highest standards and healthy competition. The problem emerges when certain individuals exhibit behaviours belonging to the malicious end of the spectrum.
It is possible that we all have some dark traits within us. Another possibility is the situational nature of some of these traits. These traits supposedly give us certain qualities that help us survive, which is why they were favoured during evolution. Also, some people may exhibit such behaviours unconsciously. A Narcissist who is extremely conscious of their self-image and invests significantly in its enhancement may not even notice when their tendency of grandiosity dominates discussions disproportionately.
Therefore, It may be more practical for organisations to introduce positive people practices that prevent these behaviours from exaggerating and if possible, enable healing. Explicit articulation and effective activation of values contributing to organisational citizenship behaviour, and promoting the usage of occupational coaching and therapy are two such examples. Using employee engagement budgets to increase bonding and connection at work could be another! In this way, organisations can continue to channelise human capital productively without jeopardizing collective and individual success.
It remains crucial to refrain from hiring toxic individuals who have previously shown toxic behaviours, and acknowledge the negative effects of their actions, but cannot demonstrate genuine remorse. As per Hogan Assessments, by assessing dark-side personality, organisations can recognise and mitigate performance risks before they become a problem. Therefore, It is also important to use friendly digital tools that use valid, culturally-sensitive and concise assessments to continually map the shadow sides of individuals, teams and organisations to remove blind spots. This allows organisations to track certain behaviours and proactively address them to minimise them and perhaps even channelise them appropriately. Organisations can diagnose pockets of toxicity in real-time without having to wait for the end of the quarter or the year. Real-time culture diagnostics can help organisations visualise heat maps of dark traits, and toxic behaviour and enable people and culture teams to act proactively to protect positivity at work.
It is expected that the recent emphasis on destigmatising mental health disorders and maladaptations and increased focus on ethnosensitivity will enable the phasing out of terms like ‘dark’ in an evaluative context. We also expect such sentiments to positively influence how these traits are identified, managed and healed in organisational settings.
