In August the journal Leadership published an article I wrote titled, “Bad Leadership – Why We Steer Clear.” Why, I asked in the piece, did the leadership industry focus almost entirely on good leadership while it ignored almost entirely bad leadership. “Overwhelmingly,” I wrote, “leadership centers and institutes; programs, courses, workshops and seminars; teachings and trainings are dedicated to growing good leaders, not to addressing bad ones.”
While there are of course exceptions to this general rule – including some of my own work, in which bad leadership and followership have been through lines – it is widely acknowledged that the leadership industry’s focus remains heavily on leadership that is constructive as opposed to destructive. Which is curious given that the world in which we live really – as opposed to ideally – is replete with bad leadership of every type.*
So, why is it that we, ostensible experts in the field, distance ourselves from what is a plague on the human condition – bad leadership. To this question, in the article I provided four answers. Given Kamala Harris’s loss in her campaign for American president and given what the Washington Post heralded as Donald Trump’s “triumph,” I will focus in this post on one of these: “The Breaches Between Us.”
What do I mean by this? I mean that applying labels to leaders such as “good” and “bad” would be easy if we could agree on what these words meant and to whom they applied. But we do not and, it appears, we cannot. In other words, my bad leader might be your good one.
Trump is an obvious case in point. To some Americans he is riddled with personal deficits ranging from being a threat to democracy, to being a harasser and abuser, to being a chronic liar and even a convicted crook. To some Americans he is riddled with political deficits ranging from being a threat to women’s health, to surrounding himself with rightwing extremists and toadies, to cozying up to some of the world’s most dangerous dictators. And, to some Americans he is riddled with psychological deficits of which the most frequently mentioned is narcissism, extreme narcissism.
But as we know the morning after if not the day before, to some other Americans whatever Donald Trump’s deficits, they matter less than his strengths. What are his strengths? Personally, he is the anti-Kamala Harris. He is male; she is female. He is white; she is black. He is a law breaker; she is a law enforcer. He glowers a lot; she grins a lot. He conveys strength; she conveys conciliation. Politically he is more right-wing, and she is more left wing. Moreover, they differ on everything from taxes to tariffs; from abortion to immigration; from Ukraine to the Middle East. And psychologically they are opposites. His campaign reflected him: he emphasized damage and darkness, American carnage. Her campaign reflected her: she emphasized hope and joy, the future not the past.
Final point: American voters had as they usually do, a binary choice. They could select either Trump or Harris. Which meant they had to choose between one candidate they thought better and one they thought worse. But because this time around the two candidates were so dramatically different, to vote for one over the other meant strong feelings were involved. I have no doubt that Kamala Harris’s most dedicated supporters feel worse this morning than did the morning after Michael Dukakis’s most dedicated supporters. (In 1988 Dukakis lost his bid for the presidency to George H. W. Bush. But the differences between Dukakis and Bush were not nearly so stark as those between Harris and Trump.)
Because of these breaches between us – breaches that in recent years have become more fervent and fractious – leadership teachers, trainers, and, yes, scholars tend to steer clear. The academy especially prefers that we avoid rendering opinions and making judgments. That we avoid delicate and politically sensitive subjects. Who needs trouble?
Well, we do. If those of us in the leadership industry continue to refuse to engage the debate – what is good leadership and what is bad? – we will continue to fail at our most important task. Which is to make clear there is a distinction between right and wrong, between good and bad.
———————————————-
*In my book, Bad Leadership: What It Is, How It Happens, Why It Matters (Harvard Business School Press, 2004), I identify seven different types of bad leadership.