Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 2

toxic leadership Related Abstracts

2 Between Leader-Member Exchange and Toxic Leadership: A Theoretical Review

Authors: Aldila Dyas Nurfitri


Nowadays, leadership has became the one of main issues in forming organization groups even countries. The concept of a social contract between the leaders and subordinates become one of the explanations for the leadership process. The interests of the two parties are not always the same, but they must work together to achieve both goals. Based on the concept at the previous it comes “The Leader Member Exchange Theory”—well known as LMX Theory, which assumes that leadership is a process of social interaction interplay between the leaders and their subordinates. High-quality LMX relationships characterized by a high carrying capacity, informal supervision, confidence, and power negotiation enabled, whereas low-quality LMX relationships are described by low support, large formal supervision, less or no participation of subordinates in decision-making, and less confidence as well as the attention of the leader Application of formal supervision system in a low LMX behavior was in line with strict controls on toxic leadership model. Leaders must be able to feel toxic control all aspects of the organization every time. Leaders with this leadership model does not give autonomy to the staff. This behavior causes stagnation and make a resistant organizational culture in an organization. In Indonesia, the pattern of toxic leadership later evolved into a dysfunctional system that is growing rapidly. One consequence is the emergence of corrupt behavior. According to Kellerman, corruption is defined as a pattern and some subordinates behave lie, cheat or steal to a degree that goes beyond the norm, they put self-interest than the common good.According to the corruption data in Indonesia based on the results of ICW research on 2012 showed that the local government sector ranked first with 177 cases. Followed by state or local enterprises as much as 41 cases. LMX is defined as the quality of the relationship between superiors and subordinates are implications for the effectiveness and progress of the organization. The assumption of this theory that leadership as a process of social interaction interplay between the leaders and his followers are characterized by a number of dimensions, such as affection, loyalty, contribution, and professional respect. Meanwhile, the toxic leadership is dysfunctional leadership in organization that is led by someone with the traits are not able to adjust, do not have integrity, malevolent, evil, and full of discontent marked by a number of characteristics, such as self-centeredness, exploiting others, controlling behavior, disrespecting others, suppress innovation and creativity of employees, and inadequate emotional intelligence. The leaders with some characteristics, such as high self-centeredness, exploiting others, controlling behavior, and disrespecting others, tends to describe a low LMX relationships directly with subordinates compared with low self-centeredness, exploiting others, controlling behavior, and disrespecting others. While suppress innovation and creativity of employees aspect and inadequate emotional intelligence, tend not to give direct effect to the low quality of LMX.

Keywords: Leadership, leader-member exchange, toxic leadership

Procedia PDF Downloads 353
1 Leaders Behaving Badly in Higher Education: Constructing Toxic Leadership from Followers

Authors: Aishah Tamby Omar, Zolkifle Ahmad


The aim of this research was to explore academician perception of toxic leadership in higher education organizations. The data consisted of 17 semi-structured interviews with academicians’ grade 45 above. According to them, toxicity in higher education organizations can be categorized as dysfunctional command, employee anti-social, less trust and commitment, abusive supervision, tyranny, unethical, hierarchical structures, and permissive environment. While they believed that culture, climate, and situational factors may form a toxic development and have the greatest influence on toxicity determination in higher education organizations. Respondents acknowledged that the future studies should involve the person who had held positions to get their opinions. These results emphasized the need for the leaders to learn about leadership in order to avoid a negative performance of the higher education organizations in the near future.

Keywords: Leadership, toxic leadership, academician perception, higher education organizations

Procedia PDF Downloads 295