Leadership: Why Narcissists Make Poor Leaders
On February 9, 2023, The Platformer broke the news that Elon Musk fired a top engineer because he reported Musk’s declining view count from Twitter followers. Musk was irritated that with his 100 million followers, he had only 10s of thousands of impressions. Casey Newton does a great job of covering the topic, including how Twitter employees are afraid to use Slack for communication for fear of losing their jobs, to the hallway chatter of where folks are interviewing, to the constant ‘firefighting’ caused by Musk’s chaotic decision making.
This news continues to grate on me with the incessant news and coverage about narcissistic leaders. A narcissist is probably the worst kind of leader an organization, or country, can have.
According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) describes Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) as possessing at least five of the following nine criteria. [Source: The 13 Traits of a Narcissist | Psychology Today]
A grandiose sense of self-importance
Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
Believing that they are "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
Requiring excessive admiration
A sense of entitlement (unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with their expectations)
Being interpersonally exploitative (taking advantage of others to achieve their own ends)
Lacking empathy (unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others)
Often being envious of others or believing that others are envious of them
Showing arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Musk possesses most, if not all, of these characteristics, as do many of our Congress people, and our recent 45th President.
Regarding Musk, I think it is ironic how a person that is ‘interpersonally exploitative,’ and ‘lacking empathy,’ is heading up a social media company. Social media, by definition, is a platform designed to share information of all types, for the purpose of collaborating and networking with others. A person with a ‘grandiose sense of self-importance,’ is not on the platform to share and collaborate, or be open to new ideas, rather, that individual is there for him/herself and to press forward his/her goals at all costs.
Why do narcissists make poor leaders? Let’s take Musk as our example and illustrate the top 5 reasons:
1 – Places self over the team
The news today Musk called a meeting about his own personal Twitter account, has everyone on tenterhooks, and then fires a top engineer for truth-telling when he does not like the answer, has little to do with the overall strategy, vision and goals of the organization. This need to put ‘self’ over the team and the organization’s goals, is hindering the company’s ability to perform. In fact, many think it may drive Twitter into bankruptcy.
2 – Focus on unlimited power, rather than overall goals
In November 2022, Musk made initial strategic decisions on his own, causing key team members to resign, including Lea Kissner, the chief information security officer, the person who heads up the team that keeps the company in compliance with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Kissner was concerned that Musk’s future decisions would expose the company to challenges from the FTC.
Also, changes made to internal Twitter policy would leave not only key executives, but also lower level team members, personally liable for being out of compliance. A spokesperson for the FTC it is “tracking recent developments at Twitter with deep concern,” to which Musk responded that he puts rockets in space and is not afraid of the FTC, thus reinforcing the idea that Musk has unlimited power, or at least more power than the FTC.
The decisions Musk made by himself without regard to the need to comply with regulations. The subsequent resignations do not help to advance company goals.
3 – Lacks the ability to cooperate with others
On November 16, 2022, Musk sent a companywide email to remaining employees demanding they commit to working “long hours at high intensity” or receive “three months of severance.” This was laughable. I have worked in the technology industry for 30+ years, and I can report that if people believe in the mission and vision of a company, they will work an incredible number of hours without being asked to do so. Loyalty cannot be forced; it is a bilateral commitment. Team members are loyal when loyalty is given from the employer. When a leader has to ask for long hours, it is already too late.
4 – Lacks empathy
In June 2022, Musk communicated that everyone must be in the office the very next day or “pretend to work somewhere else.” Team members with children were scrambling to figure out childcare within 24 hours. Here is a fellow that has no idea what it is like to arrange childcare, lacking empathy for others’ situations.
Similarly, when Musk fired workers on H1-B visas, giving them 60 days to find a new job and sponsor, or be forced to leave the country, he shows an incredible lack of empathy.
As Maya Angelou wrote, “People will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.”
5 – Requires constant admiration
Musk’s tweet about taking over Twitter in April 2022, causing the stock to rise, was his first outrageous tweet that garnered many new followers. Not only did this action manipulate the stock price, but it is a classic narcissistic move of forcing the limelight on himself.
Then, in December 2022, Musk tweeted that he would resign as CEO of Twitter if users voted him out. The result was 57.5% voted him out, and he has not resigned yet. Both actions could be viewed as a ploy for his need for admiration and attention.
Good to Great Leadership
In contrast, take the lesser-known leaders that Jim Collins researched and wrote about in Good to Great. The Good to Great kinds of leaders are not receiving flashy headlines, yet these types of leaders provide healthy work environments for 100s of 1000s of workers. We need to revere these kinds of leaders. The characteristics are:
Good to Great companies have ‘Level 5 Leadership’
Great leaders show humility, determination, and passion. They have a drive to do the right thing for the good of the company, not themselves. They are driven to make decisions, not just for shareholders, but also for the employees and customers. Notice that the CEOs are not focused only on providing shareholder value, but also what I call the Loyalty PyramidTM which includes executive leadership, team members, customers, shareholders, and the overall community that the company serves.
Get the right people on the bus
Collins talks about getting 80-90% A players for the executive team. You need the ‘A team’ before you decide where the company goes, that is because this team will bring terrific ideas as part of the collaborative C-suite. This is distinct from one person making all the decisions.
To be great, companies need to confront the brutal facts
Collins writes about the Stockdale Paradox – the highest-ranked American prisoner-of-war from the Vietnam War. “James Stockdale was locked up for a long, long time - for over eight years. In this time, many of his fellow prisoners gave up the will to live. They were the optimists. The ones who were saying, we’ll be out by Christmas or Easter or their next birthday and eventually ran out of hope. In contrast, Stockdale lived day to day, accepting the brutal reality of his situation. But he never lost faith that he would make it out alive and it would become the defining event of his life.” [Source: Monkhouse and Company]
Essentially, be brave enough to face the facts and move forward, otherwise you lose valuable time and revenues. Often times, narcissists do not face the facts, as they are so self-absorbed and certain of the power of their leadership.
The Hedgehog Concept
This is Collins’ Venn diagram that defines what an organization should focus on. It’s an intersection of what you are passionate about, what you can be the best in the world at, and what drives your economic engine.
We see narcissists focus on only one part of the Venn diagram, what they are passionate about, their own self-interest, and not the other two areas.
Good to Great companies have a culture of discipline
Collins writes about working toward incremental goals and improvements. Great leaders resist the ‘squirrel effect,’ or the incessant distractions and tug of war to work on new initiatives, or open new markets.
Jim Clear writes about micro improvements causing big changes in the long haul as well in Atomic Habits.
Musk certainly lacks that discipline at Twitter, as he gives teams new projects to work on, without much definition of the work itself. The teams are firefighting due to the constant changing of priorities.
Technology accelerators move companies from Good to Great
Use technology solutions and IT projects carefully. Successful implementations of technology improve a company’s efficiency, yet failed ones can be a huge drain on resources and morale.
Musk changed the Twitter Blue technology so rapidly that it backfired and many brands that were deemed verified, had actually been hacked. This combination of a lack of discipline and using technology initiatives without much care, resulted in a loss of faith by the public in his ability to lead.
Good to Great companies build a flywheel of momentum
When a company is in its groove, it creates a flywheel of energy and momentum that facilitates even more growth and excitement. It becomes a regenerative process.
It would be better if our media and culture focused more on the Good to Great kinds of leaders, rather than narcissistic leaders. I leave you with the sage words from Collins:
“Companies that make the change from good to great have no name for their transformation—and absolutely no program. They neither rant nor rave about a crisis [emphasis mine]—and they don't manufacture one where none exists. They don't “motivate” people—their people are self-motivated. There’s no evidence of a connection between money and change mastery. And fear doesn't drive change—but it does perpetuate mediocrity. Nor can acquisitions provide a stimulus for greatness: Two mediocrities never make one great company. Technology is certainly important—but it comes into play only after change has already begun. And as for the final myth, dramatic results do not come from dramatic process—not if you want them to last, anyway. A serious revolution, one that feels like a revolution to those going through it, is highly unlikely to bring about a sustainable leap from being good to being great.”