Apocalyptic Leadership: Steering Clear of the Four Horsemen
Achieving High Performance and Team Satisfaction
I love reading but rarely get the chance to introduce any of my favourite fiction books into my personal development focused writing on leadership and coaching. So here goes.
"I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I COULD MURDER A CURRY."
Was my introduction to the late author Terry Pratchett and his unique Discworld novels. They're a series of satirical fantasy novels known for their wit, humour and insightful commentary on the human condition that regularly tackle real-life social problems through the lens of their fantastical setting and rich characters. Terry Pratchett would use his Discworld to parody various aspects of our world, from politics and religion to technology and popular culture, making profound observations on human nature in the process.
The above line was from one of the iconic and beloved characters, DEATH. DEATH is the Discworld's Grim Reaper, talks in CAPITALS and has a very dry sense of humour. While DEATH is the grim reaper, with a skeletal appearance, black attire and a large scythe, he works very hard to do the best job he can do… being DEATH, of course.
He has a sense of fairness and duty. He prioritises his customers, acts with integrity, tries to be on time and not make mistakes, seeks feedback, delegates (when possible), and has even attempted to implement succession planning.
Check, check, check - wow, this got me thinking - perhaps this version of DEATH could be an excellent person to work for. Stay with me. I know I am stretching things here, but trust me, this should start to make sense very soon.
The destructive impact of bad managers
In my work as an executive coach, I was recently introduced to a partner at a large law firm. We explored her situational reality and how she might benefit from working with me. The most significant challenge was the deteriorating relationship with the managing partner and the need to help navigate the leadership team dynamic and maintain team cohesion during a business expansion and growth boom. At that point, I had only heard one perspective (there is always more than one point of view). Still, it was clear she needed coaching support as the toxicity level had reached unhealthy levels within the team at the top - largely down to the managing partner's behaviour and attitude.
This situation highlights that it isn't only junior or mid-tier professionals who suffer the consequences of bad leadership and poor managers. Research from The UKG Workforce Institute in 2023 found that "managers impact employee's mental health (69%) more than doctors (51%) or therapists (41%) - and even the same as a spouse or partner (69%).
The power dynamic (boss to subordinate) is still asymmetrical even when discussing the C-Suite, Partners and Managing Directors. There is likely more at stake at these top levels if you have a dysfunctional relationship with your boss.
In this case, the managing partner appeared to be a particular type of manager, sometimes called a Seagull Manager.
"A detached high-level executive. Rarely around, but who flies in occasionally and unexpectedly from who knows where and lands on your work, squarks noisily, and flaps its wings all over the place. It launches itself back into the air, circles overhead and drops a big pile of shit on everyone, and flies away, leaving everyone to clean up the mess."
Yikes.
Can you think of anyone worse to work for?
Well. Actually… maybe…
Management quality has significant variability.
There are many different types of bad managers, not just the Seagull ones, such as:
Micromanagers - These managers have difficulty delegating tasks and giving their employees the freedom to execute their jobs. They often want to control every little detail, which can stifle creativity and contribute to a toxic work environment.
Absentee Managers - The opposite of micromanagers, absentee managers are rarely available for guidance, support, or decision-making. Employees may feel neglected, and teams can become directionless as a result.
Inconsistent Managers - Inconsistency can be unsettling in a manager. This behaviour can undermine trust and create an uncertain work environment, whether it's inconsistent communication, performance reviews, or decision-making.
Poor Communicators - A lack of clear, transparent communication can lead to misunderstandings, low morale, and reduced productivity. Poor communicators often fail to provide necessary context or guidance, leaving employees confused or unsupported.
Non-Inclusive Managers - These managers create an environment where only specific individuals or ideas are valued, usually based on personal biases. This stifles diversity of thought and can cause significant harm to team morale and individual self-esteem.
Unethical Managers - Managers who engage in unethical or dishonest practices erode the trust within their team and can have long-term negative impacts on the company culture.
Autocratic Managers - These managers dictate all the activities within their purview without any consultation or feedback from their teams. This lack of autonomy can make employees feel disrespected and demotivated.
The list goes on.
Forbes even recently released a "Horrible Leaders" for Halloween last year. Predictably, it was weak on substance (it is Forbes, after all), mainly because their focus was on clickbait categories such as:
The Jekyll and Hyde Manager
The Vampire Leader
The Frankenstein Manager
The Ghost Manager
The Living Dead Leader
In my experience, bad leaders have several common traits. And so, I thought it would be fun to attempt to condense and distil all the bad manager categories into only four personas and conveniently bring us full circle to Terry Pratchett's DEATH character. Death is often cited along with Famine, War and Pestilence as the four Horsemen of the Apocalypse in literature and art as symbols of catastrophic events or terrible conditions. Well poor leadership and bad managers are often responsible for devastating decisions within their businesses, creating terrible workplaces and toxic environments for their employees. So, I present to you the Four Horsemen of Bad Leadership:
The Silent Boss lacks open dialogue and fails to provide feedback or convey expectations, which are critical communication failures in management. Poor communicators, they are guilty of being absent, overly focused on upward communication to the detriment of their team, an inability to run effective team meetings, and avoiding receiving or giving timely, constructive and actionable feedback.
The Directionless Leader lacks a clear vision for the team and fails to guide priorities, leading to scattered efforts and suboptimal performance. They are unfocused, emphasising short-termism by always firefighting, or the endless pursuit of more, and an inability to say no or to prioritise what needs to be actioned, instead expecting their teams to "do it all" with inadequate resources.
The Misguided Navigator lacks sound judgment in steering the business and team's efforts, often leading to strategic missteps and practical inefficiencies. They are poor decision makers who often exclusively rely upon gut feel, maybe distracted by the shiny new thing, which is easier than the hard work of consistently moving the business forward, or they regularly kick the can down the road because they fear making decisions.
The Self-Prioritising Supervisor tends to prioritise personal success over the collective goals and needs of the team. They are focused on the individual, not the team. Common traits are: someone who manages upwards to curry favours not to support the team, is thriving at playing workplace politics, is unable to hire A-players who might expose their inadequacies and a boss who is always looking for someone to lay the blame on for their own inadequacies.
I don't know whether distilling all the bad manager categories into only four personas is possible, but I thought it would be fun to try. Let me know what you think!
A word of caution: the Four Horsemen of Bad Leadership may still be successful leaders, while unlikely to be effective ones.
Successful leaders versus Effective ones
Fred Luthans, an academic focusing on organisational behaviour and management, distinguished between "successful" leaders and "effective" leaders, offering insights into the traits, behaviours, and outcomes associated with each. This distinction is crucial for anyone aiming to develop leadership in themselves or others.
Luthans reported that successful leaders spent considerably more time networking and staying on top of office politics and relatively little time managing people, teams, and business results. Effective leaders had the opposite profile and focused on their people and teams rather than office politics.
Successful Leaders
Definition: Luthans defines "successful" leaders as those who achieve advancements within their organisation's hierarchy through promotions, high salaries, and other traditional measures of success.
Characteristics: They are often skilled in navigating the political landscape of their organizations, building networks, and managing their impressions among superiors.
Focus: The focus tends to be on personal achievement and recognition within the organisation.
Effective Leaders
Definition: "Effective" leaders can foster high levels of performance, satisfaction, and well-being among their followers, regardless of their personal success within the organisational hierarchy.
Characteristics: These leaders are typically more concerned with developing a positive organisational climate, motivating and supporting their team members, and achieving high levels of task and team effectiveness.
Focus: The emphasis is on the success of their team and organisation rather than on personal accolades.
Does your organisation confuse these two concepts, or does it distinguish between leadership effectiveness and success? A fundamental way to tell is whether your leadership competency model, promotion criteria for executives and how you reward the desired behaviours say more about the skills needed to get promoted or to build high-performing teams.
📫 - A quote that I am currently pondering
"Notifications are just alarm clocks someone else is setting for you."
Navalism
🧾 - An absorbing and insightful (short) read
"Accidental managers" without proper leadership training contribute to almost one in three workers walking out - People Management Magazine.
This further proves that we are starting management and leadership development too late.
🤔 - If you did have the answer to this question, what would it be?
Do you want to become more like the people that you work with?