that might lead to IS project failures: managerial and technical “ (Petersen, 2020). Managerial-type failure factors relate to poor leadership, poor communication, meager competencies, and poor methodology in work. https://www.proquest.com/openview/6f9c296d5629169d6c1fa18496460d84/1?cbl=18750&diss=y&pq- origsite=gscholar&parentSessionId=7KubV1UFOvnJPJ9QkWLcHWeFeYBglRo6KxW2Vrl0qH0%3D
(2019). Dark Sides of Organizational Behavior and Leadership. IntechOpen. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.71976 . Destructive Leadership: Definitions “The systematic and repeated behavior by a leader, supervisor or manager that violates the legitimate interest of the organization by undermining and/or sabotaging the organization's goals, tasks, resources, and effectiveness and/or the motivation, well-being or job satisfaction of subordinates.” Harmful behavior imbedded in the process of leading (and by excluding behaviors falling under counterproductive work behavior), distinguishing between encouraging subordinates to follow destructive goals and using destructive methods to influence with subordinates, and by viewing destructive leadership as volitional behavior “A process in which over a longer period of time the activities, experiences and/or relationships of an individual or the members of a group are repeatedly influenced by their supervisor in a way that is perceived as hostile and/or obstructive.”
(2019). Dark Sides of Organizational Behavior and Leadership. IntechOpen. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.71976 . Destructive Leadership Underlying factors to why leaders engage in destructive leadership behaviors: • For some leaders, the answers can be found in negative personality traits (e.g., narcissism or psychopathy) • In other cases, stress and heavy workload have been suggested to be the reasons. Therefore, leaders working in anorexic or greedy organizations may more often use destructive leadership behaviors. • It has also been argued that organizational structures and norms can be the cause of destructive leadership. • Research suggests that destructive leadership is more common in organizations that are characterized by structural and organizational instability, insecurity/perceived risk, great freedom of action, in organizations with limited control mechanisms and high growth, and in rapidly transforming industries
(2019). Dark Sides of Organizational Behavior and Leadership. IntechOpen. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.71976 . Destructive Leadership: Situational Incompetence • Managers continue to make the same mistakes despite all the subject matter expert (SME) advice and information provided to the manager that is available as situation incompetence • Situational incompetence stems from managers placed in a position of authority over a domain of activity for which they are neither educated nor experienced. • Management’s lack of knowledge led them to overestimate their abilities and to underestimate the challenges. • Their lack of expertise resulted in an inability to identify competence in others and an inability to intuit an appropriate response when the project experiences challenge them (Carlton, 2018, p. 4) • The less competent an individual is within a domain, the more likely the individual is to overstate his or her perceived knowledge and ability, i.e., Dunning-Kruger effect. • Individuals who lack competence in a domain (incompetent) but are not self-aware of their lack of competence generally perceive their performance to be not significantly inferior to those who possess significant competence, training, and ability, i.e., confidence–competence dissonance (Carlton, 2018, p. 10).
(2019). Dark Sides of Organizational Behavior and Leadership. IntechOpen. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.71976 . Destructive Leadership: Situational Incompetence Much more concerning for complex IT projects, Kruger and Dunning determined that the skills necessary to do the job are the same skills necessary to identify competence in others.
little about the processes that spur dysfunctional organizational behavior—the exogenous factors—and how it affects individuals within the organization.) Should passive leadership behaviors should be regarded as destructive? Some debate that a concept should not be defined by its consequences and that passive behaviors are ineffective, not destructive. Others call to attention the negative consequences of passive behaviors and, in the light of the view that intent is of less importance, argue that it is a form of destructive leadership.
leadership roles who are psychologically absent from them. They were promoted into management and enjoy the privileges and rewards of a leadership role but avoid meaningful involvement with their teams. Absentee leadership resembles the concept of rent- seeking in economics — taking value out of an organization without putting value in. As such, they represent a special case of laissez-faire leadership, but one that is distinguished by its destructiveness.
purpose, for you, your team, your organization. 2. Build empathy with the people who do the work. 3. Build a safe environment. 4. Seek outcomes by optimizing for an overarching goal. 5. Encourage experiments and learning. 6. Catch people succeeding. 7. Exercise your value-based integrity.
Clarify purpose, for you, your team, your organization. 2. Build empathy with the people who do the work. 3. Build a safe environment. 4. Seek outcomes by optimizing for an overarching goal. 5. Encourage experiments and learning. 6. Catch people succeeding. 7. Exercise your value-based integrity. Note: I did not add transparency or communication. If you manage with these principles, you will be as transparent as is possible and you will communicate effectively.
Great management looks easy so it is easy. • Treat everyone the same way. • Performance management creates employee engagement. (It does not!) • Comparing teams is useful. • “Friendly” competition is constructive. • 100% utilization works. • No time for training. • It’s okay to move people wherever they need to go, whenever the manager wants. • Lower salaries means lower project cost • Manage by spreadsheet. • It’s a great idea to standardize on how people work (especially their agile approach.)
of Organizational Behavior and Leadership. IntechOpen. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.71976 Organizational Effectiveness and/or the well-being of the Organizational Members Anorexic: Narcissistic organizations are characterized by many destructive behaviors denying facts about themselves or using propaganda campaigns. Organizations, just as humans, are able to develop justifications for their actions, to self-aggrandize by claiming their exclusivity. Narcissistic: In anorexic organizations, staffing and material resources are kept to a minimum. Greedy: In greedy organizations, greater demands are made on individual stress coping, emotion management, competence, long working hours, constant availability, fixed-term employment contracts, and higher commitment. Sometimes, negative organizational characteristics tend to be confused with destructive leadership behavior, as it is easier to look for scapegoats among individuals then for structural problems which may be the antecedents for negative organizational behavior Dark Leadership Research
•Manage via cost accounting •Divide-and-conquer works Antithetical to Agile Approaches "Much of our contemporary management beliefs and actions arise from slavery. Yes, that includes cost accounting" (2020, Rothman). “That is, the origins of our accounting and management practices arise from the practices of slave-owners back in the 1700s and 1800s” (Rosenthal & Caitlin, 2018).
Managers are more valuable than other people. • Managers must solve the team’s problem for them. • Managers are too valuable to take a vacation. • Managers can still do significant technical work. (Or, player-coach works.) • Managers can estimate for the team. • Managers micromanage to see state. • Managers think the team needs a cheerleader. • Managers don’t admit mistakes. • Managers can concentrate on the run. • Managers expect people to bring solutions to problems. • Managers believe in indispensable employees. (Or “10X”)
Myths • No limit to the number of people you can manage. • People don’t need feedback. • Measure busy-ness, not outcomes. • Managers want to know the people are engaged. • Thinking isn't work. • Performance reviews or other evaluations are useful. (They are not.They damage relationships and performance.) • People don’t need credit for their work. • Hiring shortcuts are fine. • People are resources. (No, they are not.) • We need experts for this work. • Promote the best technical person to be a manager. • You can keep even marginally-useful people on a team.
purpose, for you, your team, your organization. 2. Build empathy with the people who do the work. 3. Build a safe environment. 4. Seek outcomes by optimizing for an overarching goal. 5. Encourage experiments and learning. 6. Catch people succeeding. 7. Exercise your value-based integrity.
kimpetersen
acompany
leafyoh
enechain
nstock
fullkaiten
gessy0129
findy_eventslides
kentarowada
shungoa
superstudio
factbase2022
yadokari
inesmontani
akosma
cassininazir
vanstee
jakevdp
nwiizo
reverentgeek
mlcsv
trallard
stuffmc
