The main focus of this research was to explore followers’ direct experiences with destructive leadership behaviour in South African organisational contexts and coping strategies that were employed to engage with this behaviour. Further, the study was interested in follower
perceptions of the characteristics of the phenomenon of destructive leadership behaviour. In this regard, I particularly explored participants’ perceptions of relational authenticity with the leader (Eagly, 2005). To what extent does a follower’s identification with the leader in terms of congruent traits, values and social representation (i.e., socio-economic, racial, gender and age cohort) influence the coping process? Further, the study explored whether participants’ psychological capital played a role in their coping process (Walumba et al., 2011).
The study contributed by giving voice to the participants’ experiences of destructive leadership and their attempts to cope with the experience. The findings revealed a
correspondence in the patterns of the destructive leadership behaviour exhibited by the respective managers as described by the participants; the reactions of the affected followers to the destructive leadership behaviour; and the way in which the affected followers
attempted to cope with the challenges of the destructive relationship.
Based on the findings of my research, suggestions are that participants’ implicit beliefs about what makes an ideal manager, their values, self-beliefs, and experiences of relational authenticity with the manager, influenced their perceptions about what constitutes destructive leadership behaviour; and coping with destructive leadership behaviour.
Participants were inclined to characterise relationship experiences with difficult managers as destructive when the behaviour of these managers opposed their closely held beliefs about what constitutes good leadership, their values, and self-beliefs. Referring to the proposed “relational model of coping with destructive leadership behaviour” (Figure 3.5), the
qualitative findings from this inquiry within South African organisational contexts extend and build on the existing understanding of what constitutes destructive leadership behaviour (Einarsen et al., 2007; Krasikova et al., 2013; Padilla et al., 2007; Price, 2003; Tepper, 2000; Tepper et al., 2011) by exploring the concept of followers’ relational authenticity with their direct leaders within multi-cultural South African organisational contexts. The findings of this study suggest a relationship between participants’ perceptions of relational authenticity with their direct manager and the experience or casting of that behaviour as destructive. Findings also suggest a relationship between participants’ perceptions of relational
authenticity and participants’ perceptions of coping with the destructive leadership behaviour. The concept of relational authenticity with regards to coping, and in particular to coping with destructive leadership behaviour, expands conceptualisations about coping (Klaussner, 2014; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Roth & Cohen, 1986) and coping with destructive leadership (Luthans, Norman, et al., 2008; Walumba et al., 2011).
The findings suggest that participants’ psychological capital may play a role in their coping with the managers’ destructive leadership style, in that this sample as a whole presented with quite high psychological capital; and the participants seemed to have “survived” the relationships with their destructive leaders sufficiently for all of the
participants to, at the time of my conversations with them, be employed in their professional roles. Two of the participants presented with more moderate psychological capital compared with the rest of the sample, and for them “surviving” was, according to their self-reports and my observations, emotionally harder. Thus, in this study, there are some indications of the potential role of psychological capital in participants’ coping with destructive leadership, though, the role of psychological capital can be regarded as vague and will need to be further explored with a larger, more diverse sample that should include quantitative methodologies. By exploring the role of psychological capital in coping with destructive leadership, this study contributed to conceptualisations about psychological capital by adding another dimension to previous studies using the concept of psychological capital in South African contexts (Du Plessis & Barkhuizen, 2012; Görgens-Ekermans & Herbert, 2013; Van Wyk, 2016).
The concept of relational authenticity may assist in addressing manager-follower relationship challenges and inform ways of coping with destructive leadership in complex multi-cultural organisational contexts, as well as in contexts that present diverse socio- economic, gender and age indicators in South Africa, as well as in similar contexts
worldwide. From a development perspective, conversations about managers’ and followers’ implicit beliefs about leadership, their values and self-beliefs, could be the conduit for managers, followers and organisations to greater awareness and understanding. These shared experiences about expectations, values and self-beliefs could assist in creating a language in which to talk about “the elephant in the room”. Exploring the life-stories of managers and followers who are in a dyadic relationship, and engaging these managers and followers in mutual conversation, could nurture and enhance positive consideration. Managers, followers and organisations are likely to benefit when organisations create conducive organisational environments where these conversations can take place safely.
Conversations about individual life stories and relational authenticity could enable greater awareness and mindfulness of the nuances in interpersonal relations. A greater
awareness of one’s own presence and the impact of one’s own presence in relational contexts could be important contributors to effective interpersonal engagements, be that at work or in personal contexts (George, 2012). As Susan so tellingly said: “… people want to be listened to”. Viewing destructive leadership behaviour and coping with destructive leadership behaviour through the conceptual lenses of relational authenticity and psychological capital enable individuals to respond in more mindful, attuned and articulate ways to their own perceptions and responses, and the perceptions and behaviours of others. Thus, containing mindless judging behaviour and, instead, fostering mutual understanding and healthy communication (Dunoon & Langer, 2011).
Recruitment and team-building practices are likely to benefit from a more mindful approach to the role incongruent relationships in terms of racial, socio-economical, gender and age diversity may have on perceptions of destructive leadership, individual well-being and effective work outcomes.
At a socio-political level, the concepts of destructive leadership, relational authenticity and psychological capital could guide understanding of followers colluding, conforming or oppositional responses to dictatorial, oppressive and corrupt leaderships.
The literature on authentic leadership suggests that, through socialisation and past experience with people in leadership positions, followers develop implicit leadership theories, which can be explained as personal constructions of the traits and capabilities required to be a
leader (Kenney, Schwartz-Kenney, & Blascovich as cited in Epitropaki & Martin, 2004). Differences in the life-stories of followers and direct managers engaged in challenging
relationships may need to be further explored in future studies. Further, it would be of interest to explore, in a South African context, if there are differences in implicit beliefs about leaders from male and female perspectives.
The role of relational authenticity in casting leadership behaviour as destructive and coping with destructive leadership behaviour could be extended in future research using more diverse samples and methodologies. In this regard, the effect on perceptions of destructive leadership behaviour and coping with destructive leadership behaviour could investigate the role of physical proximity to the leader, favouritism and perceptions of justice and fairness.
The relationship between psychological capital and coping with destructive leadership behaviour in South African organisational contexts may need to be further explored with larger and more diverse groups of participants in both qualitative and quantitative studies. In this regard, the effects and coping responses of younger workers in a South African context may need to be explored further.
I propose that future research investigate the toxic triangle dynamic as proposed by Padilla et al. (2007) to a greater extent within the South African organisational context. Findings from this study suggest that the participants tended to be wary of utilising existing human resource structures and support systems to address challenging relationships with a direct manager. Research can be directed at exploring alternative support strategies for supporting workers in coping with the impact of destructive leadership.
This study presented explorative evidence from a South African sample for the proposed model for destructive leadership, relational authenticity and psychological capital. However, future research could explore expanding this model by investigating the effects of different relational authenticity responses. If a follower perceives his/her relationship with the direct manager as authentic, is the identification in the form of colluding or conforming (Padilla et al., 2007). Further, would colluding or conforming behaviour in the long-term result in the follower also becoming a destructive leader or remain a passive conformer? On the other hand, if the follower’s perception of congruence with the leader shifts over the long- term, is this change in perception influenced by questioning or introspective follower
behaviour in terms of values, perceptions of leadership and the effects from the leader’s behaviour? Further, is a reconstruction in follower perceptions of relational authenticity with the leader, a reflection of changes in follower coping and psychological capital? With the follower-leader relationship perceived as incongruent, and thus destructive, what would be
the long-term effects in terms of a cycle of victimisation; justice interventions by the organisation; and decisions about leaving?