Clive Roland Boddy, Ross Taplin, (2016) "The influence of corporate psychopaths

on job satisfaction and its determinants", International Journal of Manpower, Vol.

37 Issue: 6, pp.965-988, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-12-2015-0199

This academic article explores the relationship between corporate psychopaths and job

satisfaction. Corporate psychopaths seek only their own rewards which creates poor

communication, inadequate training, lack of information and a lack of help in the workplace. Job

satisfaction is an emotional state of mind that reflects an affective reaction to the work being

undertaken or of one’s work experience. Job satisfaction is a determining factor in the

commitment, efficiency and productivity of employees within an organization. Job satisfaction

seems to be lower in the presence of managers who are corporate psychopaths. Low job

satisfaction causes employee absenteeism, turnover and additional recruitment and training costs.

This directly affects the profitability of an organization. This article is credible because the

author is a professor who has written two books, did TEDx talk, and wrote a paper about

corporate psychopaths. The point of this article is to point out the dangers of having corporate

psychopaths and the correlation between job satisfaction and managers who are corporate

psychopaths. The intended audience is business owners. This article is different from the other

articles in my bibliography because it directly states the consequences of corporate psychopaths

on an organization. This changed how I think about my topic because I used to believe

psychopaths could be good for businesses since they will stop at nothing to get to the top, there is

no way the business could fail. Now, I realize they are detrimental in the workplace because they

cause low job satisfaction. I like the fact that you gave a summary of what a corporate psychopath is and

also what job satisfaction is since it allows the reader to understand the usefulness and purpose of your sources. The

only thing that I may want to improve about this annotation is perhaps making a more in depth analysis of the

validity of this source. For example, showing the validity of the paper that this person wrote on corporate
psychopaths or showing who the paper was written for but besides that I believe this annotation is overall very

effective.

Dodgson, Lindsay. “Here's Why CEOs Often Have the Traits of a Psychopath.” Business

Insider, Business Insider, 7 July 2017, www.businessinsider.com/ceos-often-have-

psychopathic traits-2017-7.

This article examines why CEOs have the traits of a psychopath. CEOs typically have

personality traits such as charisma, fearlessness and cool head under stress. These personality

traits are also common in psychopaths. The thing that separates a normal CEO from a corporate

psychopath is the ability to feel empathy. Psychopaths have a resilience to chaos. They thrive on

chaos and they know that other people find it stressful. They purposefully create chaos just

because they find it easier to cope than other people. This article is different from the other ones

because it mentions reasons why a psychopath can turn out successful. IQ and education is a big

part of it. People who go down the dark road are less likely to have had a good education.

According to Dr. Swart, the spectrum of psychopathic traits is like knobs you can turn up and

down. What tends to happen in lawyers and surgeons is they’ve turned up the ones that are really

vital to being a good lawyer or surgeon and turned down the ones that aren’t as helpful. This

article is helpful because it shows the difference between a serial killer psychopath and a

successful psychopath and what leads them to becoming that type of psychopath. This article has

changed my view on my topic because it shows how convenient it is to be a psychopath when it

comes to getting ahead in business. This article is credible because the author references Dr Tara

Swart, a neuroscientist and psychiatrist. I like how you used this source to show a perspective of the

topic that not many people would discuss. I also like how you draw parallels to serial killers and how these
psychopaths are very different, using a source like this effectively draws the reader in and creates valid points that

you can use to further explain the nuances of corporate psychopaths. Overall this annotation is really well done.

John, Worsley S. "Psychopaths Wear Suits, Too." National Post, May 10, 2006, pp. WK6,

ProQuest, https://librarylink.uncc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-

com.librarylink.uncc.edu/docview/330553023?accountid=14605.

This article examines the causes of corporate psychopaths. It is more likely to find a CEO

who is a psychopath than it is to find none. This article is different from the other articles in my

bibliography because it is the only one that mentions the genetic side of successful psychopaths.

Studies have shown that in psychopaths, the parts of the brain that should be highly active when

exposed to emotional matters are not active at all. Psychopaths succeed in business because they

are manipulators and will do whatever they believe will bring them success or satisfaction in

their endeavours. Evidence suggests that they are born this way. This article is credible because

the author has devoted most of his 35-year academic career to the study of psychopathy. He is

the president of a forensic research and consulting firm, he is the author of several books and

more than a hundred articles on psychopathy. He also helped develop the B-Scan-360 which is

used by companies to screen for psychopathic traits when evaluating for promotion potential.

This article shaped my argument because it states that the key is to avoid hiring psychopaths in

the first place. The author suggests due diligence in checking references and backgrounds, and

requiring specific details from applicants on their career accomplishments.

 I like how you used the author’s credibility to show the use of a successful tool that potentially furthers

your arguments. I also like how you used this source to create a potential solution to the problem at hand. This was a

clear and detailed annotation.

Picchi, Aimee. “Where the Psychopaths Are: in Prison and the CEO Office.” CBS News, CBS

Interactive, 19 Sept. 2016, www.cbsnews.com/news/where-the-psychopaths-are-in-

prison-and-the-ceo-office/.

This news article examines the correlation between psychopaths and CEO’s. The author’s

point of view is that hiring professionals should change the way they hire people in order to

prevent psychopaths from becoming CEO’s. She suggests they focus more on skills rather than

personality. This article is based on research that was presented at the Australian Psychological

Society Congress after a study found that one in five corporate executives are psychopaths. This

article is credible because the author gets her information from Nathan Brooks, a forensic

psychologist from Bond University. Nathan Brooks conducted the research that found 21 percent

of 261 corporate professionals had clinically significant psychopathic traits. The purpose of this

article is to warn companies about psychotic traits that can be hazardous to a work environment

and give tips on how to prevent hiring psychopaths. The intended audience is CEO’s, business

owners or hiring professionals. This article is useful because it references one of the most
important studies done that examines the correlation between psychopaths and CEO’s. It also

gives tips on how companies can prevent from hiring psychopaths and tells why they thrive.

I like how you show the importance of the study to further your point on how to create a solution to the

problem. I also like how you found a news source that brings in so much good information on the topic from a

credible news source. The only thing that I might want to elaborate more on is the correlation between CEO’s and

psychopaths shown in this article. Other than that I believe that this is a very good annotation.

Overall these annotations are very well done and don’t need much tweaking at all. The only thing that may

prove to be useful to include would be more in depth explanations on the credibility of the first two sources but that

is the only change that I would really recommend making. The rest of the annotations are close to perfect.