Leader Narcissism and Follower Support: A Strategic Reciprocity? Anna M. Kötter (s2951789)
University of Groningen
Department of Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior Nettelbosje 2, 9747 AE Groningen, The Netherlands
14th June 2020
Author Note
The present paper is my master’s thesis and is written under the supervision of L. Maxim Laurijssen. Correspondence concerning this thesis should be addressed to Anna M. Kötter,
Abstract
Narcissistic leaders are egocentric and hold beliefs of grandiosity and entitlement. Their aggressive tendencies in light of criticism and their tendency to confirm their self-esteem by belittling others may lead others to perceive them as abusive. Here, the moderating role of follower support on the link between narcissism and leadership style is tested. Moreover, this research considers the moderating role of follower support on the link between narcissism and leader effectiveness. Data was collected from individual team members from different organizations. The results of this research suggest a moderating role of follower support in influencing the supportive leadership of narcissists. The support of followers seems to have a negative effect on the extent to which the narcissistic leader uses supportive leadership. Yet, neither directive leadership nor leader effectiveness were significantly moderated by follower support. Based on the results, various implications for theory and practice are discussed and guidance for future research is given.
Leader Narcissism and Follower Support: A Strategic Reciprocity?
“Narcissists think that everything that happens around them, in fact, everything that others say and do, is or should be about them.” – Babiak and Hare, 2006, p. 40 Research uncovered that narcissists can emerge in leadership positions, although it remains unclear under which conditions they are ‘good’ or ‘bad’ leaders (Ong, Roberts, Arthur, Woodman, & Akehurst, 2016). Initially, narcissistic leaders tend act ‘nice’ or ‘open-minded’ to colleagues (Schyns, Wisse, & Sanders, 2019), which enhances their chances of being selected as a leader (Grijalva, Harms, Newman, Gaddis, & Fraley, 2015; Ong et al., 2016). After some time, however, the leader’s manipulative personality emerges by taking risky actions and prioritizing self-interest over that of followers (Smith, Hill, Wallace, Recendes, & Judge, 2018). Narcissism is characterized by egocentricity, entitlement, and exploitation of others (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Generally, individuals with higher narcissism try to maintain their inflated self-view and resolve their deep-seated insecurities by seeking out the affirmation of others (Hyatt et al., 2018). This research proposes that narcissistic leaders’ positive or negative leadership largely depends on the extent to which their followers support them, which may add to our understanding of when narcissistic leaders display good or bad leadership, and when they are perceived as effective leaders.
favorably towards followers who support them (i.e., satisfy their craving for admiration and affirmation) and more hostile towards those who disapprove of them (i.e., undermine their self-image and stimulate their insecurities). This seems to suggest that followers’ support of their leader is crucial to their self-esteem and feelings of security and self-worth. In line with the idea that narcissists act in a tit-for-tat manner as “if you like me, I give you freedom; if you do not like me, I take it away”, this research considers the moderating role of follower support in the relationship between leader narcissism and supportive and directive leadership (see Figure 1).
Supportive leadership is a behavioral approach in which the leader focuses mainly on giving freedom and leeway to followers. This is typically desired and positive leadership because the leader exhibits relationship-oriented behaviors which are based on the desire and well-being of the followers (Wendt, Euwemab, & van Emmerik, 2009). In contrast, directive leadership is a behavioral approach in which the target is on restricting and taking away freedom of the followers. This is typically undesired and negative leadership because the leader displays task-oriented behaviors that are focused on productivity and structured goal achievement (Wendt et al., 2009). Under high follower support, narcissistic leaders are believed to “reward” their followers by displaying positive leader behavior (i.e., supportive leadership) towards them. In other words, they give employees what they desire (e.g., freedom). Under low follower support, narcissistic leaders are believed to “punish” their followers by withholding positive leader behavior and displaying negative leader behavior (i.e., directive leadership) instead. In that way, they take the freedom away from their employees.
when they are perceived as effective leaders. This research proposes that follower support also moderates the link between leader narcissism and leader effectiveness. Provided that narcissists are egocentric and preoccupied with themselves, narcissistic leaders are expected to be perceived as less effective under lower levels of follower support than under higher levels of follower support. Since they constantly crave affirmation, they may be too busy with their self-views instead of paying attention to their followers. When follower support is low, narcissists may turn inwards to resolve their insecurities and maintain their self-image, whereas when follower support is high, narcissists may turn outwards because their self-esteem needs are met.
Taken together, individuals high in narcissism use their followers as a means for being liked and admired (Orehek & Forest, 2016). This research aims to provide further insight into the interpersonal dynamics of leader narcissism and follower behavior and may add to our understanding how narcissism is sometimes positively and sometimes negatively linked to firm success (Duchon & Burns, 2008). Narcissism in the workplace is a serious issue that may have detrimental impact on an entire organization even leading to firm failure in extreme cases (e.g., Enron, Lehman Brothers; Duchon & Burns, 2008). Therefore, this study aims to clarify the importance of having leaders who display low or moderate levels of narcissism rather than high levels of narcissism to have productive and satisfied employees, and to eventually be successful in the business.
Narcissism and Leadership
reflects a person’s selfishness and desire for self-preservation. Individuals with high levels of narcissism “need a stage to shine” (Nevicka, De Hoogh, Van Vianen, Beersma & McIlwain, 2011, p. 910). There is a distinction to be made between the clinical and subclinical form of narcissism (Campbell, Hoffman, Campbell, & Marchisio, 2011). Clinical narcissism refers to people who suffer and seek professional help, while subclinical narcissism applies to people who do not seek help as they do not suffer themselves and can mostly function effectively in society. In this research, the focus is on this subclinical form. Campbell and colleagues (2011) stated that mostly other people suffer from the behavior of the narcissistic person, and that subclinical narcissists are grandiose and can be found in leadership positions due to their charismatic nature.
Narcissistic leadership, as defined by Kets de Vries and Miller (1997), entails leaders’ desire for power and reputation. Narcissistic leadership is driven by egoism and personal needs for authority and admiration (Kets de Vries & Miller, 1997). Similarly, Ong and colleagues (2016) observed that individuals high in narcissism actively look for leadership positions since those positions might aid their need for self-enhancement. Indeed,
“narcissistic leaders are leaders that have grandiose belief systems and leadership styles, motivated by their needs for power and admiration rather than empathetic concern for the constituents and institutions they lead” (Rosenthal & Pittinsky, 2006, p. 515). In other words, narcissists have leader emergent tendencies (Ong et al., 2016), and often rise into leadership positions (Grijalva et al., 2015; Owens, Wallace, & Waldman, 2015; Smith et al, 2018).
Once they arrive in their leadership positions, narcissists are initially liked. This is because their charismatic appeal and superficial charm makes them likeable by their followers (Nevicka et al., 2011; Schyns, Wisse, & Sanders, 2019). Indeed, Ong and
however, narcissists’ true personality comes to surface, including fearlessness, egocentric assertiveness, and dominance (Ackerman et al., 2011). This is the point at which followers no longer like and endorse them due to their overconfidence and arrogance and this is the
moment at which narcissistic leaders tend to perform poorly (Judge et al., 2006; Campbell & Campbell, 2009). This shift from initial sympathy to a perception of hostile and poor leaders can be explained by the egocentric nature of narcissistic leaders. Narcissists are known to assault and belittle others when their ego is threatened (Bushman & Baumeister, 1998) and they generally tend to view others as instrumental in that they rather enrich themselves than acting in an organizational concern (Vecchio, 2007). As the honeymoon period disappears after a while, some followers do not longer endorse their leader, which seems to indicate that narcissistic leaders may display different styles of leadership to different followers. The leadership style may therefore be related to the extent to which followers endorse them.
Supportive and Directive Leadership as Reciprocity: The Moderating Role of Follower Support
Usually, followers who support their narcissistic leaders in reinforcing their self-esteem become their “favorites” (Campbell, 1999). An example for such a narcissistic leader is Steve Jobs (CEO of Apple) who clearly preferred the company’s designer (Jonathon Ive) as his favorite employee (Isaacson, 2011; Nevicky, 2012). Narcissistic leaders remain charming to their favorites, however, with ulterior motives to be liked. This reflects their tendency to act in an exchange-oriented manner (Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). On the other hand, narcissistic leaders may dislike followers who do not admire them. Therefore, narcissists may have “unfavorite” followers to whom they act rather dominantly and potentially abusively
leadership style (Campbell, 1999; Campbell et al., 2011). There are prominent management positions (e.g., the US presidency) that have been filled by individuals who scored higher in narcissism (Rosenthal & Pittinsky, 2006). For example, Donald Trump, who shows
supportive leadership if his followers endorse his opinion and like him, while his leadership style is aggressive and dominant when they oppose his opinion and dislike him (Rudden & Brandt, 2018).
Leaders higher in narcissism appear to have personality characteristics that predispose them to use certain leadership styles (Kelloway et al., 2013). Generally, narcissists appear socially skilled, charismatic, and confident, which is crucial for efficient social engagement in leadership (Ong, et al., 2014). Their extraverted nature makes them appear likeable at first sight, even if they are overly dominant. Since narcissists are very focused on performing well to look good in front of others, they tend to use a leadership style that puts their needs first, and similarly push their followers in a dependent role (Grijalva et al., 2015).
followers in exerting supportive leader behavior. Leaders with supportive followers demonstrate more positive leadership, are more effective, and display less directive leadership than when follower support is low. Therefore, it is hypothesized:
Hypothesis 1: The link between leader narcissism and supportive leadership is positively moderated by follower support.
Hypothesis 2: The link between leader narcissism and directive leadership is negatively moderated by follower support.
Follower Support and Leader Effectiveness
In addition to the moderating role of follower support on the link between leader narcissism and their leadership style, this research also examines how follower support affect their perception of the effectiveness of their narcissistic leaders. Northouse (2019) defined leader effectiveness as the extent to which leaders successfully manage to influence and guide followers towards the attainment of goals.
Previous research focused on the influence of narcissism on leader effectiveness (Gijalva et al., 2015; Ong et al., 2016). Narcissists appear to possess personality traits, such as extraversion, that allow them to be socially competent and sympathetic so that their followers perceive them as effective leaders (Ong et al., 2016). Research by Grijalva and colleagues (2015) showed that subclinical narcissism facilitates the emergence of leaders but does not facilitate the effectiveness of leaders. So, although narcissistic leaders manage to rise to leadership positions, they may not show effective leadership in these positions. Thus, leaders who showed very high levels of narcissism were less effective (even detrimental) than leaders with moderate levels of narcissism. This can be explained by the egocentric nature of narcissists (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Leadership is an opportunity for
the other hand, high follower support suggests that the narcissistic leader’s needs are satisfied, and therefore the leader will turn towards their followers (Grijalva et al., 2015).
This research focuses on the extent to which follower support moderates the link between leader narcissism and leader effectiveness. Specifically, it is predicted that when follower support is low, narcissistic leaders’ primary goal is on themselves, which entails satisfying their need for admiration and restoring or preserving their fragile self-esteem. In doing so, they are not attentive to the followers’ and organisations’ needs, and hence they will be perceived as ineffective. Under high follower support, however, their self-esteem is “satisfied” because their followers endorse them, and they can turn to their leader duties and they will be perceived as effective leaders. Therefore, it is hypothesized:
Method Procedure
After receiving ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board of the faculty of Economics and Business, the online survey was distributed via Prolific. This platform ensures a representative sample because respondents went through a screening procedure they guarantee is accurate. The objective of this procedure was to recruit only employees who work in multiple teams 1(i.e., more than two) for at least 21 hours a week. Moreover,
respondents were required to have English as their mother tongue, and to have the United States or the United Kingdom as their nationality and current residence. Filling in the survey took the respondents on average 13 minutes (SD = 6.5).
Respondents
The final sample consists of a total of 280 employees, of which nine were excluded because they did not fulfil the study requirements in that they indicated to work less than 21 hours a week. Employees were ranging in age from 18 to 72 (Mage = 33.6, SDage = 9.11). The
majority of the respondents were women (67.5%). Respondents had either the American or British nationality. Of the respondents, 45% held a bachelor’s degree, 27.3% a high school degree, 23.6% a graduate or professional degree (MSc, MA), 2.2% a Master of Business Administration (MBA) and 1.8% a doctoral degree (PhD). Most employees indicated having worked more than 4.6 years for their current employer (SD = 5.88), and they were supervised for 2.8 years on average (SD = 3.12). Employees’ mean tenure was 14.8 (SD = 10.84). Generally, employees worked a mean of 39 hours a week (range 21-60, SD = 7.04). Of the respondents, 94.4% worked simultaneously in two or more teams at their current employer.
1 This data was part of a larger data collection amongst three students as part of their master’s thesis.
The number of teams ranged from two to five teams, whereas the average employees worked in 2.5 teams (SD = 0.85).
Measures
Leader narcissism (IV). Leader narcissism was measured with the Narcissistic Personality Inventory-13 (NPI-13; Gentile et al., 2013). The other-report NPI-13 is a shortened version of the self-report NPI-40, measuring the extent to which someone is affected by the subclinical narcissistic personality disorder, based on the DSM-IV criteria. Sample items from this scale included the following: “My direct supervisor likes having authority over other people” and “my direct supervisor has a strong will to power” (M = 20.67, SD = 3.23, α = .83). Respondents gave answer on a dichotomous scale, scoring either “yes” or “no”.
Supportive leadership (DV). Supportive leadership was measured with the five-item scale by Wendt and colleagues (2009). Sample items from this scale included the following: “My direct supervisor works to develop a close personal relationship with me” and “my direct supervisor believes my feelings are as important as the task at hand” (M = 67.16, SD = 8.18, α = .93). Respondents answered on a 7-point Likert response scale, ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”.
Directive leadership (DV). Directive leadership was measured with a five-item scale developed by Wendt and colleagues (2009). Sample items from this scale included the following: “My direct supervisor makes most decisions for me” and “my direct supervisor motivates me by letting me know what will happen if my work is unsatisfactory” (M = 64.94, SD = 6.03, α = .77). Respondents replied on a 7-point Likert response scale, that ranged from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”.
10-point Likert response scale, respondents had to rate the overall effectiveness of their direct supervisor from 1 = “not effective at all” to 10 = “outstanding”.
Follower support (moderator variable). Follower support was measured by a single-item scale which was adapted by Kaiser and colleagues (2010). Participants rated the extent to which they support and endorse their direct supervisor on a 10-point Likert response scale ranging from 1 = “not at all” to 10 = “completely”.
Control variables. Seven controls were included: gender, age, education, working hours, tenure, work experience, and years of supervision. These were considered to be possible confounding variables as, first they may relate to how effective leaders are in fulfilling their duties, and second, they may relate to the style (e.g., supportive or directive) leaders use in guiding followers.
Results Preliminary Analyses
The PROCESS-macro in SPSS was used (Model 1) to test the main hypotheses of this study (Hayes, 2013). Afterwards, hypotheses H1-H3 were tested by conducting three times a single-level analysis for each of the dependent variables. To test the relationship between leader narcissism and leadership style, the moderating role of follower support on the relationship between leader narcissism (IV) and the leadership styles (DV) as well as the effectiveness of the leader (DV) was tested. Table 1 (see Appendix) depicts correlations of variables measured as well as descriptive statistics, including control variables. There was a moderate positive link between narcissism and supportive leadership (r = .42), and a strong negative link between narcissism and directive leadership (r = -.51). In addition, there was a strong positive link between supportive leadership and follower support (r = .62) and a weak negative link between directive leadership and follower support (r = -.18). Leader
.80), which assumes that these concepts move into the same direction. Further, leader effectiveness showed a weak negative relationship with directive leadership (r = -.14). Hypothesis Testing
First, the moderating role of follower support on the relationship between leader narcissism and supportive leadership was tested (Hypothesis 1). There was a significant main effect for the link between leader narcissism and supportive leadership (b = .11, SEb = .03, t(267) = 4.30, p < .001). So, narcissists are generally more likely to display supportive leadership. 43% of variance of supportive leadership could be predicted from leader narcissism. Furthermore, there was a significant main effect for the link between follower support and supportive leadership (b = .27, SEb = .03, t(267) = 10.04, p < .001). Thus, whether followers endorse their leader is predictive of the extent to which followers perceive that their leader engages in supportive leadership. Finally, the interaction between narcissism and follower support was also significant (b = -.02, SEb = .01, t(267) = -2.37, p = .02). Hypothesis 1 received partial support, as follower support moderated the link between leader narcissism and supportive leadership. However, this moderation was not positively as
Fortunately, controlling did not change the results in a meaningful way since there were no significant changes in the main and interaction effect, nor did the direction change.
Second, the moderating role of follower support on the relationship between leader narcissism and directive leadership was tested (Hypothesis 2). There was a significant main effect for the link between leader narcissism and directive leadership (b = -.19, SEb = .02, t(267) = -9.10, p < .001). The relationship was negative which suggests that narcissistic leaders are less likely to display directive leadership. 26% of variance of directive leadership could be explained from leader narcissism. The results provide no support for a significant link between follower support and directive leadership (b = .01, SEb = .02, t(267) = .21, p = .83). So, whether followers support their leader tells nothing about the extent to which supporters believe that their leader is exercising directive leadership. Finally, there was no significant interaction between narcissism and follower support (b = .002, SEb = .02, t(267) = .28, p = .78). This suggests that the link between leader narcissism and directive leadership does not depend on follower support. Thus, the effects of leader narcissism on leadership style were not moderated by follower support. Therefore, hypothesis 2 is not supported regarding directive leadership style. In addition, a regression including the control variables was conducted. Amongst the control variables, only age was linked to directive leadership style (b = -.02, SEb = .01, t(267) = -2.12, p = .04). This suggests that the younger the
employee, the more likely it is that the leader uses directive leadership. Finally, there were no significant changes in the main and interaction effect, meaning that the control variables had no meaningful impact on the results.
effective leaders. There was a significant main effect for the link between follower support and leader effectiveness (b = .80, SEb = .04, t(267) = 19.20 , p < .001). Hence, whether followers endorse their leader is predictive of the extent to which followers perceive their leader as effective. Finally, there was no significant interaction between narcissism and follower support (b = -.01, SEb = .01, t(267) = -.67, p = .50). Thus, the effects of leader narcissism on leadership effectiveness were not moderated by follower support, and
hypothesis 3 is not supported. 64% of variance of leadership effectiveness could be explained from leader narcissism. Moreover, an additional regression including the control variables was performed. However, the inclusion of control variables did not lead to significant changes in the results.
Discussion
In the current study, it was predicted that the support of followers would positively moderate the relationship between narcissism and supportive leadership. In addition, it was hypothesized that follower support would negatively moderate the relationship between narcissism and directive leadership. Lastly, it was predicted that the support of followers would moderate the relationship between narcissism and leader effectiveness in a positive way. The results of the current study showed that narcissism was indeed positively associated with supportive leadership. Moreover, this relationship was moderated by follower support, which corresponds to the first hypothesis. However, follower support moderated this
support the prediction that follower support moderated the link between leader narcissism and leader effectiveness.
Theoretical Implications
Research on leader narcissism has mainly focused on the way narcissistic leaders behave towards their followers. As Campbell and colleagues (2011) stated, the leadership style reflects whether leaders like or dislike their followers. This research goes beyond previous studies in that it looked at the impact followers have on their narcissistic leader and in turn the narcissistic leader’s reaction in form of leadership style and effectiveness. Earlier research mainly took the view and perceptions of the narcissistic leader into account, whereas in this research the focus was predominantly on the impression of followers. The followers reported the extent to which they perceived their leader’s actions as narcissistic and the degree to which they feel supported or neglected by their leader. Since leadership involves not only the leader but also the followers, it is of high importance to shed a light on the viewpoint of the followers. This comes along with the risk for common source bias, but since narcissistic leaders tend to have self-inflated views detached from reality (Liao et al., 2019), solely asking narcissists about themselves may also bias the results. In such a case, narcissists typically aim to present themselves as socially desirable as possible (Liao et al., 2019).
This study investigated whether narcissists behave differently towards followers who satisfy their cravings for admiration compared to followers who disapprove of them.
the more followers support their leaders, the less likely they are to display supportive leadership. The link between narcissism and supportive leadership was not as initially assumed positively moderated by follower support. Instead, follower support had a negative impact on the link, which implies that if followers hardly support their leader, higher
narcissism is most helpful in being a supportive leader. Thus, as follower support decreases, the relationship between narcissism and supportive leadership becomes more positive. This contradicts Morf and Rhodewalt (2001) who found that narcissists are exchange oriented. Also, Campbell and colleagues (2006) revealed that narcissists generally expect reinforcing relationships with their followers. In this study, narcissists did not require affirmation to be a supportive leader. Even the opposite occurred, and narcissistic leaders valued less support. Since this study was based on self-reports of followers, narcissists may convince their followers that they do not act exchange-oriented but agency-oriented.
Additionally, the longer the followers received supervision, the more likely it was for the narcissistic leader to stop getting attention by followers, leading to less supportive
leadership. This suggests that the leadership narcissists display is not as much linked to how much support they receive from followers, and followers may not be the most important source of acknowledgment to their leaders.
freedom. In contrast, they are inclined to act in favor of their followers. The link between narcissism and directive leadership was, in contrast to the prediction, not moderated by follower support. This suggests that relational aspects matter less than assumed in the
development of narcissistic leadership. According to De Vries (2018), personality traits such as dishonesty, disagreeableness and carelessness are at the core of narcissistic leadership. Narcissistic leadership is driven by egoism and personal needs for admiration (Kets de Vries & Miller, 1997). Given that they are constantly occupied with themselves, they may
unconsciously blank out their follower’s actions. In this research, it could not be
distinguished between favorite and unfavorite followers since only followers’ perceptions of the leader were measured. Possibly, the followers in this study were favorite followers, and therefore, the leader showed neither dominant nor volatile behaviors toward them.
Furthermore, the age of the employee played a role in determining directive
leadership. The younger the leaders were, the more they tended to use directive leadership. Generally, younger leaders are more competitive, energetic, and performance-oriented than older leaders (Oshagbemi, 2004). According to Oshagbemi (2004), these leaders want to prove and promote themselves, while they are willing to take risks in order to achieve
success. This refers to directive leadership in which the leader is strongly focused on the task itself and the outcome (Wendt et al., 2009). Contrary to previous research, this study showed that narcissists are not always harmful and that restricting freedom and exercising dominance over their followers is not their priority.
role. Research by Grijalva et al. (2015) revealed that leaders with moderate levels of
narcissism are more effective than those with high or low levels. In this study, however, the level of narcissism was not tested, and therefore, no conclusions can be drawn about the relationship between the manifestation of narcissism and leader effectiveness. Taken
together, the results suggest that the support of followers neither encourage narcissists to use directive leadership styles, nor to be more effective leaders.
Practical Implications
The results of this research clarified that narcissistic leaders cannot be pigeonholed in terms of their leadership styles. Narcissism showed only moderate positive correlations with supportive leadership, but high negative correlations with directive leadership. Even if narcissistic leaders share common characteristics (e.g., agentic, dominant), easily associated with certain leadership styles (e.g., directive leadership), they should not be initially related with them.
So, it might be that every narcissistic leader has his/her own leadership style or a combination of different styles depending on individual personality traits, the affirmation of followers or other factors. Followers should be aware of the egoistic nature of narcissists, and although narcissists overly focus on themselves, they should not be labeled as bad leaders who only disregard the needs of their followers.
they are not perceived as effective, they may try to make an effective impression through their extraverted nature.
While recruiting, HR specialists should be aware of the paradoxical personality of narcissists and immediately identify individuals with the narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). The implementation of personality tests (e.g., Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Test, Big Five Personality Test) can be helpful in detecting discrepancies. If organizations test for extreme abnormalities in the recruitment phase, any errors in performance could be
prevented. However, organizations should not be dismissive to individuals with subclinical forms of narcissism since their leadership can be supportive. If a leader turns out to be destructive, organizations can train narcissistic leaders to lead more effectively and increase support among followers in positive ways.
Limitations and Directions for Future Research
Although this research may contribute to our understanding of leader narcissism, the results should be interpreted in light of potential data limitations. Most importantly, in a group of three master’s thesis students, a multi-level study should be conducted with a leader version and a follower version of a questionnaire. Unfortunately, this data collection initiative had to be cancelled due to the COVID-19 crisis. Consequently, full trust was devoted to instruments for measuring self-reporting from one single source, which proved to be prone to bias by common methodology and common sources (Podsakoff, McKenzie, Lee, &
Podsakoff, 2003). However, as explained in the theoretical implications, in the case of leader narcissism, it is interesting to measure the perception of leader narcissism by followers instead of leaders’ own narcissism.
the social desirability bias and inflated self-perceptions that are common among narcissists (Liao et al., 2019). For example, we only tested how followers perceived their leaders but not how leaders perceived their followers (e.g., recognition of the followers). Our results are relevant for when employees’ perception of their supervisor may relate to subclinical
narcissism, but do not allow drawing conclusions for the effects of follower support in cases of clinical narcissism (i.e., the narcissistic personality disorder). For future research
directions, both self and other perceptions of leader narcissism should be validated in a validation study, possibly incorporating social desirability, to see to what extent they overlap. Future studies should also consider within-person factors such as the personal attributes of the leader in addition to between-person factors such as relational aspects. Moreover, future research needs to consider personality traits that may have an impact on the curvilinear relationship between narcissism and leadership effectiveness.
In addition, the use of single-item scales for leader effectiveness and follower support could have narrowed the results in terms of validity and reliability. Single-item scales usually show low content validity and lack a measure of internal consistency (i.e., Cronbach’s alpha). Even though research has found that one single-item measurements are valid substitutes for longer scales (Fisher, Matthews & Gibbons, 2016), future studies could benefit from the use of multi-item measurements in measuring leader effectiveness and follower support in narcissistic leaders.
Conclusion
This research contributes to the literature by highlighting the irrelevance of the followers’ endorsement in laying the foundation for narcissistic leaders’ style. The more narcissistic the leader is, the more supportive and the less directive they are in their
References
Ackerman, R. A., Witt, E. A., Donnellan, M. B., Trzesniewski, K. H., Robins, R. W., & Kashy, D. A. (2011). What does the narcissistic personality inventory really measure? Assessment, 18(1), 67-87.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5®) American Psychiatric Pub.
Babiak, P., & Hare, R. (2006). Snakes in suits: When psychopaths go to work. New York, NY, US.
Bushman, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct and displaced aggression: Does self-love or self-hate lead to violence? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 219.
Campbell, W. K. (1999). Narcissism and romantic attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1254.
Campbell, W. K., Brunell, A. B., & Finkel, E. J. (2006). Narcissism, interpersonal self-regulation, and romantic relationships: An agency model approach.
Campbell, W. K., & Campbell, S. M. (2009). On the self-regulatory dynamics created by the peculiar benefits and costs of narcissism: A contextual reinforcement model and
examination of leadership. Self and Identity, 8(2-3), 214-232.
Campbell, W. K., Hoffman, B. J., Campbell, S. M., & Marchisio, G. (2011). Narcissism in organizational contexts. Human Resource Management Review, 21(4), 268-284. De Vries, R. E. (2018). Three nightmare traits in leaders. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 871. Duchon, D., & Burns, M. (2008). Organizational narcissism.
Fisher, G. G., Matthews, R. A., & Gibbons, A. M. (2016). Developing and investigating the use of single-item measures in organizational research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 21(1), 3-23. doi: 10.1037/a0039139
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218. Fredrickson, B. L., & Branigan, C. (2005). Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention
and thought‐action repertoires. Cognition & Emotion, 19(3), 313-332.
Freud, S. (1914). Zur Einführung des Narzissmus. Jahrbuch Für Psychoanalytische Und Psychopathologische Forschung, 6(1), 1-24.
Gentile, B., Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., & Campbell, W. K. (2013). A test of two brief measures of grandiose narcissism: The Narcissistic
Personality Inventory–13 and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory-16. Psychological assessment, 25(4), 1120.
Grijalva, E., Harms, P. D., Newman, D. A., Gaddis, B. H., & Fraley, R. C. (2015).
Narcissism and leadership: A meta‐analytic review of linear and nonlinear relationships. Personnel Psychology, 68(1), 1-47.
Hyatt, C. S., Sleep, C. E., Lamkin, J., Maples-Keller, J. L., Sedikides, C., Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. (2018). Narcissism and self-esteem: A nomological network analysis. PloS One, 13(8), e0201088.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Isaacson, W. (2011). The exclusive Biography of Steve Jobs.
leadership, and task and contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 762.
Kaiser, R. B., Overfield, D. V., & Kaplan, R. E. (2010). Leadership Versatility Index version 3.0 facilitator’s guide. Greensboro, NC: Kaplan DeVries Inc.
Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Harvard Business Press.
Kelloway, E. K., Weigand, H., McKee, M. C., & Das, H. (2013). Positive leadership and employee well-being. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 20(1), 107-117.
Kets de Vries, M. F. R., & Miller, D. (1997). Narcissism and leadership: An object relations perspective.
Liao, S., Zhou, X., Guo, Z., & Li, Z. (2019). How does leader narcissism influence employee voice: The attribution of leader impression management and leader-member exchange? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(10), 1819. Morf, C. C., & Rhodewalt, F. (2001). Unraveling the paradoxes of narcissism: A dynamic
self-regulatory processing model. Psychological Inquiry, 12(4), 177-196.
Nevicka, B., De Hoogh, A. H., Van Vianen, A. E., Beersma, B., & McIlwain, D. (2011). All I need is a stage to shine: Narcissists' leader emergence and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 910-925.
Nevicka, B., De Hoogh, A. H., Den Hartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2018). Narcissistic leaders and their victims: Followers low on self-esteem and low on core self-evaluations suffer most. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 422.
Nevicky, B. (2012). Narcissistic leaders: the appearance of success.
Ong, C. W., Roberts, R., Arthur, C. A., Woodman, T., & Akehurst, S. (2016). The leader ship is sinking: A temporal investigation of narcissistic leadership. Journal of Personality, 84(2), 237-247.
Orehek, E., & Forest, A. L. (2016). When people serve as means to goals: Implications of a motivational account of close relationships. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(2), 79-84.
Oshagbemi, T. (2004). Age influences on the leadership styles and behavior of managers. Employee Relations, 26(1), 14-29. doi:10.1108/01425450410506878
Owens, B. P., Wallace, A. S., & Waldman, D. A. (2015). Leader narcissism and follower outcomes: The counterbalancing effect of leader humility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(4), 1203.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended
remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879.
Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 617-633.
Rudden, M., & Brandt, S. (2018). Donald Trump as leader: Psychoanalytic perspectives. International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, 15(1), 43-51.
Schyns, B., Wisse, B., & Sanders, S. (2019). Shady strategic behavior: Recognizing strategic followership of dark triad followers. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(2) Smith, M. B., Hill, A. D., Wallace, J. C., Recendes, T., & Judge, T. A. (2018). Upsides to
dark and downsides to bright personality: A multidomain review and future research agenda. Journal of Management, 44(1), 191-217.
Stein, M. (2013). When does narcissistic leadership become problematic? Dick fuld at lehman brothers. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(3), 282-293.
Trzesniewski, K. H., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2008). Is “Generation me” really more narcissistic than previous generations? Journal of Personality, 76(4), 903-918. Trzesniewski, K. H., Donnellan, M. B., & Robins, R. W. (2013). Development of
self-esteem. Self-Esteem, 60-79.
Vecchio, R. P. (2007). Leadership: Understanding the dynamics of power and influence in organizations. University of Notre Dame Press.
