There are so many positive sides of leadership that we often forget to talk honestly about what can happen if the leadership has a negative connotation. According to Gallup research conducted in 2021, twenty-nine percent of leaders demonstrate dangerous behavior that costs the companies much effort to cover. In addition, this unwanted behavior causes stress, anxiety, and conflicts that escalate to unpleasant situations. According to the same research, leaders were demonstrating hazardous behavior, the number one factor for teams to fall apart.
Still, after this research results, companies continue to stimulate dangerous behavior and lose their brightest talents by tolerating it.
You may ask yourself what hazardous behavior means and how leadership can create a hazard. After all, leadership was meant to be an alternative to the corporate bureaucratic management dominating the 20th century. The leadership paradigm evolved as a centric set of initiatives, aiming to involve people in achieving the company’s great goals by seeing them as their own goals.
But yet, you read about the hazard of leadership. Maybe this sounds strange to you or even inappropriate. I thought the same way when I first discussed leadership as a phenomenon years ago. But now there is much evidence that leadership has a positive impact on people’s lives and a negative note that can destroy structures and teams.
Here are the four signs to look for to identify how hazardous the leadership in your organization or team has become.
People connected to us say that they suffer.
Every leader wants to hear how happy people around them are. At the same time, sixty-one percent of people say that the leader responsible for them is doing a poor job of engaging them. So, no matter the situation, the leader must focus on how people feel and if they feel excellent, just good, or have the worst experience. The feedback from people suffering is often offensive, with critical words and “final decisions.” But for the leader to turn that suffering into well-being, they must first understand what people mean by “suffering” and then form the appropriate reactions to deal with it.
Leader sticks to tradition instead of welcoming innovation.
There is so much written on this simple topic. And leaders still demonstrate a connection to the tradition after all the pages and positions explained in different posts, comments, and books. However, in a dynamic world where innovation can be seen daily, thinking in the same old models as twenty years ago is a clear sign of stagnation. The organizations most suffering from this syndrome are the governmental organizations. During the years of building complex structures, these same and many similar organizations have created a working model and stuck to it no matter the changes. “We have always done it that way,” “It is the only right way for things to be done.” – Have you heard these words? Well, these words are making me personally mad. Instead, the leader should embrace tradition and open the way to new things in the life of the organizations they lead.
Team members leave to seek more growth opportunities and dynamics.
I have personally experienced that two times in my life. And I think that if the leader is not focused on bringing constant changes and challenges, people leave to search for something different. So, if one or two people join the organization, the leader should consider boosting dynamics. Still, suppose most of the people are leaving the organization with the intent to find more opportunities for growth and higher dynamics. In that case, the leader should seriously consider critically evaluating the environment and bringing the organization back on track with the winners.
Group members try to take over leadership.
Have you seen a weak leader surrounded by people who are more potent than them? Decisions often happen around the leader and do not include them. As a result, the leader is often blamed for their position and cannot manage to take on a new initiative involving others. This weak leader often creates more discrepancy than an environment for growth. Feeling that the leader cannot stand them up, employees start to feel the power to fight the leader and replace them by excluding their role from all processes and decisions. That often leads to confusion and negatively impacts the team’s structure, decisions, relationships, and balance.
IN CONCLUSION:
Hazardous leadership is a challenge companies and leaders often face. Identifying one or all of the signs is a good ground to step on and start working on changing the environment so that the hazard becomes a positive framework. No matter the size, the culture, or the attitude, even the best intentions can be easily turned into hazardous impacts. Preparing for the hazard may save time and, at the same time, boost positive transformation and long-term well-being. So, did you find any of the signs in your organization? … And… What will you do to change the situation?
The Human place 