THE NATURE OF NARCISSISM WITHIN ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP by Dean A.

Wonneberg

PR EV

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University April 2007

IE

UMI Number: 3253625

Copyright 2007 by Wonneberg, Dean A. All rights reserved.

Copyright 2007 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

PR EV

UMI Microform 3253625

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

IE

 Dean Wonneberg , 2007

PR EV

IE

THE NATURE OF NARCISSISM WITHIN ORGANIZATIONAL LEADERSHIP by

has been approved March 2007 APPROVED:

ACCEPTED AND SIGNED:

PR EV

DAVID CHAPMAN, Psy.D., Faculty Mentor and Chair LORI LA CIVITA, Ph.D., Committee Member

BRUCE FISCHER, Ph.D., Committee Member

_______________________________________ DAVID CHAPMAN, Psy.D.

_______________________________________ Garvey House, Ph.D. Dean, School of Psychology

IE

Dean A. Wonneberg

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 MiniMarkers, 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

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.

PR EV

IE

significantly correlated with the number of leadership roles held within ones career. Narcissism

Dedication To my friends and family who have stood by me during this lengthy projectmainly my wife Heather who showed amazing patience and my children Matthew and Holly whose future prompted this educational pursuit.

PR EV
iii

IE

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.

PR EV
iv

IE

Table of Contents Acknowledgments List of Tables CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Introduction to the Problem Background of the Study Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study iv viii 1 1 2 6 7

Nature of the Study Significance of the Study Definition of Terms Assumption and Limitations

W IE
v

Research Questions

8 8 8 9 12 14 15 15 15 28 33 38 41 42 42

Organization of the Remainder of the Study CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction Narcissism Big Five Attachment Deception Conclusion CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY Restatement of the Purpose

PR EV

Research Design Target Population Selection of Participants Measures Variables Procedures Null Hypotheses Data Collection

42 43 43 44 45 46 46 47

Expected Findings CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Introduction Survey Overview

W IE
vi

Data Analysis

47 49 50 50 50 53 55 61 63 65 69 71 71 71 73

Statistical Assumptions Correlations

Self-Deceptive Enhancement and Impression Management Factorial Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) Null Hypotheses and Actual Findings Summary CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION Introduction Leadership Demographics

PR EV

Big Five Personality Attachment Style Deception Summary Limitations Recommendations Conclusion REFERENCES

74 75 76 77 78 79 82 83

PR EV
vii

IE

List of Tables Table 1. Survey Demographic Items and Raw Data Table 2. Survey Data (Big Five, Narcissism, Attachment, Deception) Table 3. Dominant Attachment Style Table 4. Significant Correlations (Demographics, Big Five) Table 5. Significant Correlations (Narcissism, Attachment, Deception) Table 6. Narcissism by Gender, Age and Marital Status Table 7. Narcissism by Employment Role 51 52 53 55 56 57 58

Table 9. Narcissism by Language

Table 8. Narcissism by Number of Leadership Positions Held in Career

59 60 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 66

Table 10. Narcissism by High and Low Big Five Scores Table 11. SDE by Gender, Age and Employment Role Table 12. SDE Scores by High and Low Narcissism

Table 13. Narcissism by Combinations of High and Low IM, SDE Table 14. Demographic Item Factorial ANOVAsTests of Between Subjects Effects Table 15. Big Five Item Factorial ANOVAsTests of Between Subjects Effects Table 16. Attachment Item Factorial ANOVAsTests of Between Subjects Effects Table 17. Deception Item Factorial ANOVAsTests of Between Subjects Effects

PR EV
viii

IE

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

Kaiser, 2003; R. Hogan & Kaiser, 2005). Managerial incompetence was first defined by Bentz

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 nonvoluntarily (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)

PR EV
1

IE

(1985, as cited in R. Hogan & Sinclair, 1997) where the subject manager is (a) unable to delegate

for managerial incompetence in organizational settings range from 30% to 75% (DeVries &

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

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 interventionsa 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 maturitysomething which could 2

PR EV

IE

that currently plague organizations.

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 DSMIV, 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

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 persons 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 relationshipa 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 3

PR EV

IE

matter appears to be lacking.

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

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 4

PR EV

IE

Five empirical studies on NPD.

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

that the two cannot be separatedand 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 Freuds 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 5

PR EV

IE

theory for adults in the workplace. They insist there is a relationship between love and work

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 childrens 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).

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 (IO) psychologists to assess for ethical leadership. This was outlined by Winum in his APA Division 13 Presidential Address:

PR EV
6

IE

Considering these three viewpoints, the use of attachment theory in the current study may

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) Winums 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

personality assessments (R. Hogan, Hogan, & Roberts, 1996).

These five problems are central to the current study proposala proposal that will be offered accordingly.

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.

PR EV
7

Purpose of the Study

IE

(DeVries, 1993). Part of this may be misconceptions over the reliability and validity of

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

Conscientiousness. Past Big Five, can narcissism be described in terms of attachment theory? How exactly does it relate to attachment style and to deception?

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.

The current study was important as organizations are experiencing high levels of managerial incompetence and derailment. Specific dysfunction within organizational life is not 8

PR EV

Nature of the Study

Significance of the Study

IE

as having high Neuroticism, high Extraversion, low Openness, low Agreeableness, and low

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).

reliable, and brief (15 minutes) assessment battery might prove valuable. Moreover, the subject assessment battery that considers difficult, dark side traitsincluding deception and emotional stability within leadershipmight prove even more valuable in the future.

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. 9

PR EV

Definition of Terms

IE

The study is also relevant to human resource and I-O assessors. The subject valid,