In developing organisational talent, one universal issue is that of leaders’ arrogance and narcissism, which mysteriously manifests only after they have reached the pinnacle. Watch the Apple Plus film The Escape Of Carlos Ghosn and read the stories of either Brij Bhushan Saran Singh, former Indian wrestling federation president, or Luis Rubiales, former Spanish soccer federation president, to confirm that arrogant leaders are found in politics, companies, sports clubs, scientific establishments, and even in housing societies.
Imagine a character in a drama. By his body language, we know this character. We can tell by his manner that he loves himself. Like the pot calling the kettle black, sometimes a well-recognised arrogant person may refer to another as arrogant with feigned humility.
Having observed the destructive role of leadership narcissism, in 2018, I wrote a book titled Crash: Lessons from the Entry and Exit of CEOs. Dacher Keltner, psychology professor at the University of California, concluded from his experiments and studies that, when under the influence of power, leaders “acted as if they had suffered a traumatic brain injury”. This is a sufficient reason for people in power to move on rather than stay in one role for too long.
Talented executives rise to the seniormost levels due to performance, skills, human relationships and charisma. Once they reach the pinnacle, they have a tendency to forget an important soft lesson: it is tougher to stay up there than it was to get there. While trapped in the headiness of office, every leader is prone to the dangers of hubris, ego, and loss of human empathy.
The leader could lose her connection with people that helped her rise in the first place. There are several tell-tale signals. First, the conviction that he or she knows what is right, and, more debilitatingly, that others are wrong. Second, the rasping desire to be the centre of attraction for all events that promote visibility of the leader, particularly inaugurations and laudatory celebrations. Third, an enthusiasm and willingness to engage with non-questioning audiences rather than to engage with internal prickly questioners. Fourth, a distrust of others, and not letting anyone get too close. Fifth, an air of personal bravado and drama in every action. Sixth, being surrounded by obvious sycophants and admirers.
Contrast this style with how humble leadership manifests. It was charming to watch the scientists in the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), who appeared humble and almost self-effacing after their recent successful Chandrayaan 3 landing. According to insiders, these leaders exemplified ISRO as an institution—from Vikram Sarabhai and Satish Dhawan to S P Somnath. When a mission failed, the chairman faced the media. When a mission succeeded, the project team addressed the media.
In a well-known instance, when India’s first satellite launch vehicle (SLV-3) failed in 1979, chairman Satish Dhawan stood before the media and took responsibility for the failure. Next year, when the launch was successful, he immediately handed over the podium to project director Abdul Kalam, putting him in the limelight. Somnath seems to be continuing this tradition. He named his predecessors and credited them for their legacy, guidance and support. Contrast this approach with the tendency of arrogant incumbents to rubbish past leaders and grab all the credit.
What can the remedy be? I suggest two approaches: first, secure a Clementine mirror for the leader, and second, impart our traditional values during organisational training sessions.
I associate the name of Winston Churchill’s wife, Clementine, with a psychological mirror. Just as an optical mirror reveals the warts and defects on the face, a psychological mirror reveals the warts and defects of the leader’s behaviour—visible to others but not to the leader. Clementine is thought to have subtly influenced her husband by counselling the irascible leader about his tantrums and their negative effect on his colleagues. Every leader needs a Clementine mirror. It may be a partner, a sibling, a colleague or any person who is able to correct the leader’s behavioural aberrations constructively by speaking truth to power.
Knowing when to leave is an important leadership skill. British military historian Barney White-Spunner wondered why Britain, which made the mistake of a delayed departure from India, did the same when withdrawing from Basra after the Middle Eastern War of the 1990s.
Leaders can crystallise four lessons from our Vedantic tradition.The first is to be more self-aware. Even an inscription in the forecourt of the Temple of Apollo in Delphi states ‘gnothi seauton’, which means know thyself.The second is to protect the resources that help a leader achieve his or her aims—people, partners, air, water, and natural resources, among others.
The third is to serve others before serving oneself—employees, customers and community, for example.
The fourth is to take firm and clear-headed decisions but to implement them with human compassion.
While discussing the broad subject of how great institutions build great talent and future leaders—through talent density, talent portability, assigning responsibility, and fixing accountability—institutions and future leaders should not lose sight of the pitfalls on the way. Beware of leaders in clubs, associations, companies, bureaucracies and politics.An arrogant leadership style is one such major pitfall.
R Gopalakrishnan
Author and business commentator. His fifty-year professional career was spent in Hindustan Unilever and Tata Group