THE NATURE OF NARCISSISM.pdf
-
Upload
mihaela-ionescu -
Category
Documents
-
view
59 -
download
5
description
Transcript of THE NATURE OF NARCISSISM.pdf
THE NATURE OF NARCISSISM
WITHIN ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP
by
Dean A. Wonneberg
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Capella University
April 2007
PREVIEW
UMI Number: 3253625
32536252007
Copyright 2007 byWonneberg, Dean A.
UMI MicroformCopyright
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
All rights reserved.
by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
PREVIEW
THE NATURE OF NARCISSISM
WITHIN ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP
by
Dean A. Wonneberg
has been approved
March 2007
APPROVED:
DAVID CHAPMAN, Psy.D., Faculty Mentor and Chair
LORI LA CIVITA, Ph.D., Committee Member
BRUCE FISCHER, Ph.D., Committee Member
ACCEPTED AND SIGNED: _______________________________________ DAVID CHAPMAN, Psy.D. _______________________________________ Garvey House, Ph.D. Dean, School of Psychology
PREVIEW
Abstract
The present study considers the frequency and nature of narcissism within organizational
leadership. The study considers narcissism as a possible source of high rates of managerial
incompetence and derailment seen in the literature. Participants completed the Narcissistic
Personality Inventory-16 (NPI-16), the Paulhus Deception Scales (PDS), the Big Five Mini-
Markers, and the attachment style Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) which together comprise a
brief, valid, and reliable self-report assessment battery for organizational purposes. Among the
conclusions, it was found that narcissism increases by seniority of organizational role and is also
significantly correlated with the number of leadership roles held within one’s career. Narcissism
is positively correlated with Extraversion and Openness and negatively correlated with
Agreeableness. Narcissism was also positively correlated with self-deception. No other
significant relationships were found including any with the various attachment styles.
PREVIEW
iii
Dedication
To my friends and family who have stood by me during this lengthy project—mainly my
wife Heather who showed amazing patience and my children Matthew and Holly whose future
prompted this educational pursuit.
PREVIEW
iv
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge the necessary direction offered by my dissertation
committee (Dr. Lori La Civita and Dr. Bruce Fischer) and especially to Dr. David Chapman who
has overseen my educational travels the past 7 years. I must also thank Dr Roger Tweed of
Kwantlen University College for his insight and guidance.
I would also like to thank the Credit Union staff I have worked with the past several years
including my peers at Coast Capital Savings, Surrey BC, Canada for their support and
understanding.
PREVIEW
v
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments iv
List of Tables viii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1
Introduction to the Problem 1
Background of the Study 2
Statement of the Problem 6
Purpose of the Study 7
Research Questions 8
Nature of the Study 8
Significance of the Study 8
Definition of Terms 9
Assumption and Limitations 12
Organization of the Remainder of the Study 14
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 15
Introduction 15
Narcissism 15
Big Five 28
Attachment 33
Deception 38
Conclusion 41
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 42
Restatement of the Purpose 42
PREVIEW
vi
Research Design 42
Target Population 43
Selection of Participants 43
Measures 44
Variables 45
Procedures 46
Null Hypotheses 46
Data Collection 47
Data Analysis 47
Expected Findings 49
CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS 50
Introduction 50
Survey Overview 50
Statistical Assumptions 53
Correlations 55
Self-Deceptive Enhancement and Impression Management 61
Factorial Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) 63
Null Hypotheses and Actual Findings 65
Summary 69
CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION 71
Introduction 71
Leadership 71
Demographics 73
PREVIEW
vii
Big Five Personality 74
Attachment Style 75
Deception 76
Summary 77
Limitations 78
Recommendations 79
Conclusion 82
REFERENCES 83
PREVIEW
viii
List of Tables
Table 1. Survey Demographic Items and Raw Data 51
Table 2. Survey Data (Big Five, Narcissism, Attachment, Deception) 52
Table 3. Dominant Attachment Style 53
Table 4. Significant Correlations (Demographics, Big Five) 55
Table 5. Significant Correlations (Narcissism, Attachment, Deception) 56
Table 6. Narcissism by Gender, Age and Marital Status 57
Table 7. Narcissism by Employment Role 58
Table 8. Narcissism by Number of Leadership Positions Held in Career 59
Table 9. Narcissism by Language 60
Table 10. Narcissism by High and Low Big Five Scores 61
Table 11. SDE by Gender, Age and Employment Role 62
Table 12. SDE Scores by High and Low Narcissism 63
Table 13. Narcissism by Combinations of High and Low IM, SDE 63
Table 14. Demographic Item Factorial ANOVAs—Tests of Between Subjects 64 Effects
Table 15. Big Five Item Factorial ANOVAs—Tests of Between Subjects Effects 65
Table 16. Attachment Item Factorial ANOVAs—Tests of Between Subjects 66 Effects
Table 17. Deception Item Factorial ANOVAs—Tests of Between Subjects Effects 66
PREVIEW
1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Introduction to the Problem
Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) may be reason why
organizations see high levels of incompetence within their leadership ranks. Estimated base rates
for managerial incompetence in organizational settings range from 30% to 75% (DeVries &
Kaiser, 2003; R. Hogan & Kaiser, 2005). Managerial incompetence was first defined by Bentz
(1985, as cited in R. Hogan & Sinclair, 1997) where the subject manager is (a) unable to delegate
or prioritize, (b) reactive instead of proactive, (c) unable to maintain relationships with network,
(d) unable to build a team, (e) possesses poor judgment, (f) is a slow learner, and (g) has an
overriding personality defect.
Managerial derailment, which stands at approximately 50% (R. Hogan & Sinclair, 1997),
has also been found to revolve around characteristics that are narcissistic in nature. Leslie and
Van Velsor (1996) found derailment centered on poor interpersonal skills (being insensitive,
arrogant, cold, aloof, and overly ambitious), unable to get work done (betraying trust, not able to
follow through), unable to build a team, and unable to make the transition after promotion. They
defined the derailed as one
Having reached at least the general manager level, either leaves the organization non-voluntarily (through resignation, being fired, or retiring early) or is plateaued as a result of a perceived lack of fit between personal characteristics and skills and the demands of the job. (p. 1)
PREVIEW
2
The earliest derailment research was conducted by McCall and Lombardo (1983), who found
that common factors of derailment include (a) specific performance problems, (b) insensitivity to
others, (c) failure to delegate or build a team, and (d) overdependence on a single advocate or
member.
Similar descriptors are used by the American Psychiatric Association (APA, 2000)
regarding NPD where individuals may be arrogant, lack empathy, are preoccupied with fantasies
of power, are interpersonally exploitative, and are envious of others. Thus, there may be a
linkage between narcissism and the significant rates of managerial incompetence and derailment
that currently plague organizations.
Background of the Study
There are a number of recent discussions on narcissism within an organizational setting.
For example, in group settings, narcissism predicts making a strong initial impression and being
nominated as leader, although later being rejected by the group due to arrogance and harshness
(Paulhus, 1998). This arrogance and harshness by narcissistic organizational leaders may also be
fundamental to the problem of noncompliance to executive coaching interventions—a problem
often cited in the literature (Argyris, 1991; Brotman, Liberi, & Wasylyshyn, 1998; Kilburg,
2001). Argyris commented
Because many professionals are almost always successful at what they do, they rarely experience failure. And because they have rarely failed, they have never learned how to learn from failure . . . . They become defensive, screen out criticism, and put the ‘blame’ on anyone and everyone but themselves. (p. 99)
One of the few thorough systemic studies on leadership was provided by Collins (2001),
who outlined progressive leadership in terms of humility and maturity—something which could
PREVIEW
3
be considered the antithesis of narcissism. He found that humble and stable leaders impacted
organizations in terms of significant, positive, stock valuations over the long-run.
Together with other personality disorders, NPD is central to the Hogan Development
Survey (HDS; R. Hogan & Hogan, 2001). The HDS cites recurring derailment themes from the
literature, some of which has been previously outlined. The HDS aligns these themes with DSM-
IV, Axis 2 (personality disorder) categories. Thus, NPD is considered the HDS theme bold;
Histrionic Personality Disorder is considered the HDS theme colorful, and so on. In all, eleven
derailment themes are connected with DSM descriptors; however, empirical research on the
matter appears to be lacking.
R. Hogan (1994) has long contended that dark side characteristics of leaders largely
remain undetected by psychological tests and assessments. Dark side or “irritating tendencies
that alienate subordinates and interfere with a person’s ability to form a team” (R. Hogan, p. 499)
remain hidden because
They coexist with high levels of self-esteem and good social skills . . . . Because managers with dark side tendencies often do well in procedures that evaluate the leadership potential of strangers, their counterproductive tendencies will be apparent only after they have been on the job for some time. (p. 499)
Vogel (2006) made a similar finding where narcissists are able to make a good impression at the
beginning of a personal relationship—a relationship that soon unravels. Foster and Campbell
indicated that regarding romantic relationships “narcissism is associated with infidelity, game
playing, and low commitment” (2005, p. 551). McCoy also confirmed a “successful narcissist
can put on a pleasant social face to attract new admirers” (2006, p. 172). However, “once an
admirer is drained dry and can (or will) no longer provide the admiration the Narcissist desires,
she is cast aside” (McCoy, p. 173).These observations have obvious connotations for the
PREVIEW
4
workplace. Narcissists may be talented at gaining the power they crave; however, in the long run,
their dysfunctional ways get the best of them and the organizations they serve.
Although personality is increasingly defined in terms of the Big Five or Five-Factor
Model (FFM) traits of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Agreeableness, and
Conscientiousness (APA, 2004) Narcissistic Personality Disorder is not well-studied and is
especially under-researched (Morrison, 1995). Regarding personality, McCrae (1994) speculated
and provides a theoretical model of NPD outlined as: high Neuroticism, high Extraversion, low
Openness, low Agreeableness, and low Conscientiousness. However, there are only a few Big
Five empirical studies on NPD.
Regarding the Big Five personality traits on the Industrial-Organizational front, there is
evidence that Conscientiousness is predictive of performance (APA, 2004; Barrick & Mount,
1991) where “most researchers seem satisfied to conclude that Conscientiousness is a generally
valid predictor of job performance” (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000, p. 869). There is also increasing
evidence that both Conscientiousness and Extraversion are predictive of performance (Barrick &
Mount, 1993; Barrick, Stewart, & Piotrowski, 2002; Mount, Barrick, & Strauss, 1994; Salgado,
1997) and some evidence of Extraversion having a more qualified relationship with performance
(e.g., sales positions, social situations; Barrick & Mount, 1991; Hough, Eaton, Dunnette, Kamp,
& McCloy, 1990; Thoresen, Bradley, Bliese, & Thoresen; 2004). However, there are those that
see Extraversion as too wide a construct with no apparent relationship with performance (J.
Hogan & Holland; 2003). Nevertheless, Big Five is seen as a theory fundamental to
understanding various personality issues including those in an organizational setting.
There are also very few descriptions of narcissism in terms of attachment save for
Smolewska and Dion, who found that covert narcissism “has predictive value for estimating
PREVIEW
5
individual differences in adult attachment, especially anxiety attachment and vice versa” (2005,
p. 65). Bowlby (1969, 1973, 1980) and Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, and Walls (1978) provided
the framework for attachment theory where infants were found to seek out close contact with a
significant caregiver especially in times of distress. Secure attachment to the attachment figure is
hypothesized as providing a secure base for the infant's exploration. Insecure infants were found
to be concerned with their mothers' availability, therefore extinguishing exploration or becoming
seemingly occupied with objects to avoid contact with the mother.
From this, Hazan and Shaver (1990) made important distinctions regarding attachment
theory for adults in the workplace. They insist there is a relationship between love and work—
that the two cannot be separated—and that work in adult life as parallel to the exploration seen in
infancy and childhood. Burge et al. (1997) maintained that secure attachment provides a base
that allows people to successfully negotiate the challenges of college and work. Pistole (1997)
ended her discussion by insisting attachment theory is ripe for further application. Thus, it can be
seen that attachment theory is an important consideration for the workplace and may be central
to the topic of narcissistic leadership.
The roots of narcissism are debated and the three major academics on this front are Kohut
(1971), Kernberg (1975), and Millon (1981). Kohut developed the idea of Freud’s narcissism
which begins in childhood. As the child develops, ideas are integrated into a mature personality
where grandiosity is repressed and the idealization of the parent becomes the basis for strong
values. However, if trauma occurs during this development the most narcissistic version of the
self remains.
Kernberg (1975) saw narcissism as purely pathological and defensive where aggression
and inferiority are the primary starting points. There is a continued need, by the child, to protect
PREVIEW
6
the good self from the bad self which leads to mechanisms of splitting and projection. This lack
of integration results in the pathological formation of a grandiose self where the child withdraws
and learns to rely solely on his or her self (Emmons, 1987; Heiserman & Cook, 1998).
Millon (1981) endorsed a social learning viewpoint to narcissism. He believed that a
narcissistic subject is created when parents hold inflated views of their children’s talents. The
child is treated as special with significant amounts of attention; however, this illusion cannot be
sustained and difficulties arise when the child becomes subject to the realities of the outside
world (Emmons, 1987; Alloy, Acocella, & Bottzin, 1996).
Considering these three viewpoints, the use of attachment theory in the current study may
provide valuable clues to the etiology of narcissism within leadership.
Statement of the Problem
From the previous discussion, it is clear that there are a number of problems that need
addressing when considering the topic of narcissism within the workplace. First, narcissism
continues to be under researched as indicated years ago by Morrison (1995). Second, narcissism
may be intertwined with more commonly discussed issues such as managerial derailment and
managerial incompetence. Questions persist as to the root and prevalence of managerial
dysfunction. Third, although Big Five and attachment theories have become main-stream they
have not been applied to the topic of narcissistic leadership.
Fourth, all of this is related to the greater stated problem for Industrial-Organizational (I-
O) psychologists to assess for ethical leadership. This was outlined by Winum in his APA
Division 13 Presidential Address:
PREVIEW
7
In our selection and development work, we need to explore the characterological dimension of leaders, not just job and technical competencies. We should incorporate ethical considerations in assessing and developing organizational culture. Shortcomings in these areas within organizations can lead to devastating costs when unaddressed. (2005, p. 177)
Winum’s comments are relevant, as according to DSM-IV criteria, narcissists could possibly
engage in unethical activity depending on the specific situation (e.g., interpersonally exploitative,
lacking empathy, being envious of others, and showing arrogant, haughty behaviors).
Fifth, there is the general need for brief but valid and reliable I-O assessments. Currently,
organizations are unwilling or unable to assess for incompetence although tools may be available
(DeVries, 1993). Part of this may be misconceptions over the reliability and validity of
personality assessments (R. Hogan, Hogan, & Roberts, 1996).
These five problems are central to the current study proposal—a proposal that will be
offered accordingly.
Purpose of the Study
The current study utilized a nonexperimental quantitative design together with a
convenience sample. It considered the prevalence of narcissism with leaders in an organizational
setting and empirically examined descriptions of narcissism in terms of Big Five personality and
attachment style. The study utilized a brief but valid and reliable assessment battery to meet the
time constraints and efficiency demands of organizations today.
PREVIEW
8
Research Questions
Research solely considered the topic of narcissism within leadership. There were two
main issues which were the frequency or prevalence of narcissism and the nature of narcissism
that could be described in terms of other models:
One, what are the prevalence rates of narcissism? For example, Torgersen, Kringlen, and
Cramer (2001) put prevalence of NPD at .8% (SD = .2%) of the population. How common is
narcissism in organizational life?
Two, what is the nature of narcissism seen with leaders? McCrae (1994) saw narcissists
as having high Neuroticism, high Extraversion, low Openness, low Agreeableness, and low
Conscientiousness. Past Big Five, can narcissism be described in terms of attachment theory?
How exactly does it relate to attachment style and to deception?
Nature of the Study
The study considered behavior that is regular and predictable within a large sample size,
where statistical relationships were identified and findings will be generalized to the greater
population, thus, a quantitative study was appropriate (Creswell, 2003). The number of factors
considered also made a quantitative effort more appropriate. Further, the study utilized known,
quantitative, assessments that are valid and reliable. Overall, it was well justified to execute the
study with a quantitative design.
Significance of the Study
The current study was important as organizations are experiencing high levels of
managerial incompetence and derailment. Specific dysfunction within organizational life is not
PREVIEW
9
well understood (R. Hogan & Kaiser, 2005) while narcissism is especially under-researched
(Morrison, 1995), thus, this study provides understanding to organizations and I-O psychologists
as to the high incompetence and derailment rates observed. It may also increase understanding as
to how personality, attachment, and organizational role (among other factors) relate to
narcissistic leadership.
The research study considered ethnic cultures as represented by subjects who fluently
speak another languages than English. This research met the recent requests of psychological
journals to pursue understanding of ethnically diverse subjects (e.g., Strauss, 2004).
The study is also relevant to human resource and I-O assessors. The subject valid,
reliable, and brief (15 minutes) assessment battery might prove valuable. Moreover, the subject
assessment battery that considers difficult, dark side traits—including deception and emotional
stability within leadership—might prove even more valuable in the future.
Definition of Terms
Attachment style. Regarding attachment theory, “most researchers currently conceptualize
and measure individual differences in attachment dimensionally rather than categorically”
(Fraley, 2004, p. 1). As such, there are four basic attachment types based on two dimensions
labeled avoidance and dependence (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991) which can be scored on a
continuous basis. The four styles that shall be considered are secure, dismissive (also known as
avoidant), preoccupied (also known as anxious or ambivalent), and fearful. They are described
as follows:
1. Secure: It is relatively easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others not accept me.
PREVIEW