Narcissistic Leadership Project

Introduction 

Narcissistic and covenant leadership, although rarely utilized, have different traits and characteristics that makes them unique ways of managing the followers. Narcissistic leaders are described as self-absorbed. They are not only entitled but are also possess a feeling of superiority. They are aggressive in the face of criticism and bolster their self-worth by continuously derogating others. On the contrary, covenant leaders are concerned with fulfilling their ethical responsibilities. They regard leadership as a two-way promise where the leaders have an obligation which they are supposed to fulfill. They are considered to be ethical stewards who owe their followers the opportunity to pursue their interests and also to empower them towards success. Leadership is a moral responsibility that focuses on the transaction between the leader and the followers. Although narcissistic leadership is viewed in bad light, leaders that have utilized it have reported some degree of success in their endeavors. However, ideally, covenant leadership is the most preferable given that it employs ethical and Biblical teachings. Narcissistic and covenant leaderships are two distinct philosophies of transaction between the leader and the follower which have few areas of overlapping. 

Narcissistic Leadership 

First, it is crucial to understand narcissism as a trait that individuals hold. A narcissistic person possesses grandiose and extremely positive views about themselves (Nevicka et al., 2018). The behavior is said to have been on the rise in Western countries. However, the fact that leaders of this caliber have emerged confirms that it has become part and parcel of societal value. Nevicka et al., (2018) goes ahead to identify the main characteristics determining this type of leader including extraversion, confidence, and dominance. They have a positive perception about themselves coupled with charisma, a factor that could assist them in ascending to power. Rosenthal & Pittinsky (2006) describe narcissism as a “personality trait encompassing grandiosity, arrogance, self-absorption, entitlement, fragile self0esteem, and hostility” (p. 617). Since the term is associated with many negative connotations, it is expected that the leaders will also follow the same course. First, it is crucial to appreciate that the plans, vision, and actions of these kinds of leaders align with their personal psychological needs. Narcissistic leaders are in a constant quest for recognition. Therefore, this places them in a pole position to engage in behaviors such as self-nomination and self-promotion (Rosenthal & Pittinsky, 2006). 

However, this does not mean that narcissistic leadership is entirely bad. Many studies have shown that the perpetual quest for glory can motivate the leader to make bold decisions and also fulfill transformative innovation. However, they are prone to damaging systems and relationships. Rosenthal & Pittinsky (2006) further notes that these leaders can ignore advice even from experts and take more credit that is due. Most fundamentally, they have the behavior of blaming others even if they are the persons to be blamed for the fault. Rosenthal (2006) assert that the behaviors seen in a narcissistic leader originate from their feeling of inferiority and emptiness. According to the authors, the feelings can be so pervasive that they moderately take reprieve from occasionally taking undue credit and blaming others for their faults. The author says, “Narcissistic leaders constantly self-aggrandize in an attempt to “defend maniacally against a feeling of emptiness or narcissistic hurt” (Rosenthal, 2006 p. 44). These leaders lack the capacity to sustain positive perceptions about themselves. Therefore, any misstep or mistake from someone could cause them to react disproportionally. Therefore, narcissistic leaders can be hard to deal with especially on the part of the followers such as employees due to their overbearing nature. 

Motivation is an important aspect when determining the rationale behind the operation of a narcissistic leader. In the context of a narcissistic leader, Camm, (2014) describes motivation as the constant quest to feed on the grandiosity. As a result, this could cause the narcissistic leader to be overly restless, often demonstrating workaholic tendencies. These leaders have a fragile sense of self-esteem and view others as potential rivals. Their constant search for prestige, power, and glamor places them in a pole position to hold leadership positions. Their organizational life is characterized by making superficial friends, manipulation of others, and an overall sense of drama. However, with their disliked tendencies, these individuals have the capacity to drive the organization to new heights. Camm (2014) says, “The preoccupation with fantasies that characterize many narcissists can be channeled to present a vision for the future of a company” (p. 2). Their perception of self-importance makes them able to withstand their quest to achieve their goal irrespective of what the naysayers feel. Other positive skills associated with these individuals include the strong oratory and persuasive skills that could open new opportunities for an organization. They have strength and charisma which could easily drive individuals towards their already identified goal or objective. 

Covenant Leadership 

First, it is crucial to appreciate the meaning of the word covenant. Fischer, (2017) defines covenant as “A morally informed agreement or pact based upon voluntary consent, established by mutual oaths or promises, involving or witnessed by some transcendent higher authority, between peoples or parties having independent status” (p. 2). The making of covenants is a worldwide idea. Furthermore, it is considered the basis upon which societies form. Covenants are different from contracts due to their ethical and Biblical foundation. The covenant sets the center stage for virtues such as accountability, mutual care, and empowerment. Individuals in a covenant are required to observe a host of characteristics including mutuality, trust, and shared values. In a covenant leadership, the focus of a leader is to serve the followers and remain accountable to them (Fischer, 2017). They act as servant leadership is aim is to lead by example and correct whenever a person has one wrong. Self-gratification is least of their worries. They propelled by the desire to see things turning out right. More importantly, they draw inspiration from the life of Jesus Christ who served without seeking any reward coming his way. 

Caldwell & Hassan (2016) come up with what is known as the covenantal leadership model. It is about the creation of transaction systems between the leaders and the followers. First, leaders are required to serve their followers. In this regard, the authors say, “The Covenantal leader values employees as unique individuals who deserve to be treated with dignity and respect and who are owed the moral duty of being able to become their best” (Caldwell & Hassan, 2016 p. 1). The second characteristic in the model is leadership by example. The covenant leader begins by demonstrating their values to their followers. They present their integrity to their followers by modeling whatever they believe in. Their primary focus is to keep promises and honor commitments. Thirdly, the covenant leaders are in a constant teaching expedition. They explicitly understand that the main way to become excellent performance is through improving knowledge-wise. They understand that the team members should continuously acquire much-needed feedback to enhance their personal growth. Additionally, they are in constant search for the truth. Finally, they should always work to inspire others. The leaders appreciate the fact that success will not only come from them but rather their ability to empower their followers. Empowerment is a crucial tool that enhances success and enables people to overcome their hurdles in life. 

According to Pava (2015), covenantal leadership reflects the teachings of the Old Testament regarding the principle of a shared community. The author goes ahead to describe three fundamental characteristics that define a covenant. First, it emphasizes mutual responsibility; it is long-term in nature and respects human dignity. Although the concept of covenant leadership is not new, it is increasingly finding its way in the modern business application. Research has shown that it plays a significant role in improving employee commitment. Secondly, it has a direct impact on long-term organizational success. Also, it is critical to appreciate that covenant leaders are people-centered. They are focused on using skills that transform the attitudes, perceptions, and philosophies of their followers. They achieve success by positively impacting the people and presenting themselves as an example. They are self-motivated and draw inspiration from the holistic success of the people. Some of the characteristics they depict include humility, positivity, self-consciousness, and focused on the needs of the others. They are faithful to the contract binding them and the obligation they have to fulfill as the leaders. Therefore, this places them in a pole position to succeed. 

Comparison 

The first point of comparison regards the factors that drive them. Braun (2017) asserts that narcissists act in their best interest. By doing this, they put the interests and needs of others at an increased risk. They are guided by the need to achieve praise and self-gratification. Everything they do it is for their own glory. As such, this makes them highly ambitious and can, therefore, do anything humanly possible to ensure that they ascend to the top. They are driven by the desire to be better than what they were yesterday. As such, this could easily translate to power hunger and self-satisfaction. On the contrary, covenant leaders are driven by the desire to serve their followers. They understand that the organization does not revolve around them but rather the interest of every stakeholder. They regard leadership as a position to act on behalf of the people rather than acting on one’s behalf. Other aspects that drive covenant leaders include the tendency to empower people and find the best out their abilities. 

The second point of comparison is on the character traits possessed by the two parties. Brunell et al., (2008) summarize the character of a narcissistic leader when he says, “One possibility is that narcissists have skills and qualities that are beneficial for becoming leaders but not necessarily beneficial for serving as effective leaders” (p. 1663). While working with the followers, they possess an inflated feeling about themselves. Also, they are likely to fail to recognize the input of others in their endeavors. They are guided by qualities such as greed, selfishness, and the desire to accumulate power at the expense of others. However, a covenant leader is the direct opposite in terms of character traits. The leaders draw their philosophy from Biblical teachings embedded in the Old Testament. In the Bible, God made Covenants with different leaders including Abraham and Moses among others. They were required to remain faithful in it and serve the people rather than leading them. Similarly, a covenant leader can be described as transformational (Fischer & Schultz, 2016). They are people-centered and are aware of their role in inspiring every one of them. They consider their follower to be a partner rather than a subject. As a result, this warrants them to behave in respectful ways and in a manner that observes human dignity. 

The third area of comparison is the impact that the two forms of leadership could have on a group or organization. Narcissistic leaders have often been criticized for their selfishness and grandiosity. However, in the respective organizations they work, the probability that they ascend to high positions remains high (Xiaohong Xiao et al., 2013). These leaders have a strong personality and the desire to achieve the best in their lives. They are constantly pushed by self-gratification due to the multiple insecurities they have. Also, narcissistic leaders are rarely satisfied as they keep pushing boundaries and setting new standards for themselves. As a result, they are able to inspire their followers to think highly of themselves and work to achieve even the most impossible of tasks. Similarly, covenant leaders are transformational in what they do. They challenge themselves by inspiring people (King, 2010). Most fundamentally, they are transformational in the sense that they impact change by exemplification and servant leadership. It would, therefore, be right to conclude that in this respect, both the narcissistic and covenant leaders have similar characteristics. In both instances, leaders can achieve the much-desired success by impacting their followers in different ways. 

Change in Police Department 

As described in the case study, the outgoing chief of police was responsible for narcissistic leadership traits in the police department. Therefore, as the new police chief, I am tasked with the duty of changing the organizational leadership structure by employing the covenant leadership principles. As described by Braun, (2016), narcissism as a leadership aspect is characterized by more negative than positive traits. The police department remains one of the most delicate areas of leadership in a country. For police to achieve the goals they have to work in synergy and officers must have mutual respect for one another. However, a narcissistic leader often thrives in bullying, aggression, and even embezzlement. Therefore, a change plan will be required to avoid the problems associated with narcissistic tendencies in the police department. Managers and employees at the lower levels of the organization will lack the much-needed autonomy in a leadership structure that favors narcissism. Applying the covenant leadership model sets the center-stage for trust. According to Parris & Peachy (2013), covenant leaders are more concerned with the wellbeing of the employees. They guarantee a host of benefits in an organization including enhancing mutual responsibility, promoting common good, fostering relationships, and encouraging free exchange among others (Moisan, 2004). 

Covenant leadership enhances strong working relationships within an organization (Hammond, 2013). Most importantly, the relationship is built on many dimensions contrary to the popular belief that it is about two people only. As the incoming police chief, I would need to ensure that the police department makes meaningful relationships across different platforms. The first covenant that the police will make will be between the department and the community. As such, this will improve trust, reliability, and most importantly, help in the process of community policing. The department will also establish a covenant with the city government. Lastly, it will seek to underscore its moral commitment to society as a whole. Such aspects cannot be achieved when dealing with a narcissistic leader who favors self-interest, negative assumptions, restrictions, and self-regulation among others. However, it is vital to appreciate that the process of building covenant is slow and often takes long as different parties must show commitment and hard work. Each party must be in a position to trust the other for a covenant to last and bear the much-required outcomes. 

When building these covenants, honesty should be the primary consideration. Also, parties must stay away from negative emotions such as fear, anger, doubts, and incomprehension (Marquez, 2013). In the process of rebuilding the police department, my primary aim will be to restore the faith that the community might have lost for the police. Building relationships is about integrating both people and organizations into working together for the better achievement of common goals (Valentini, Kruckenberg, & Starck, 2012). The main form of community building that the police will need to use is the community policing. One of the most significant changes that will need to happen will center on integrating the police as part of the community. Occasional town hall meetings and awareness campaigns will bring the people and the law enforcers together. As the police chief, I will employ a more transformational leadership style where leadership by example and continuous capacity buildings form the leadership pillars. As previously outlined, covenant leaders are servant leaders. The police department will, therefore, create service desks in different parts of the community to ensure that the people are better served. 

Smaller changes that will take place include ensuring that the police adhere to the laws and guiding ethical principles. Secondly, the police will need to wear body-worn cameras as part of strengthening their covenant with the people. Thirdly, a rationale will be put in place to ensure that the police respect human dignity and appreciate the diverse nature of the community they work in. In this regard, a hotline will be created where citizens will give comments, concerns, and feedback as to how they receive treatment. In this regard, the advantages that the police department will face include greater accountability and responsibility. They will also enjoy better relationships with the public, a factor that will help in bolstering community policing. However, several challenges will also occur. First, building covenants is a slow process that could take years to accomplish. However, police chiefs do not stay in one position for a very long time. Therefore, chances are high that without ample time, only little could be achieved. A police leader needs to follow strict bureaucratic rules and guidelines. Therefore, this could affect the relationships they make and the entire process of covenant building. 

Conclusion 

Leadership remains a vital aspect of an organization aiming to achieve their goals. Different leaders have different personalities, styles, guiding principles, and philosophies. From the discussion, it is apparent that narcissistic leadership is a less ideal way of managing people. The leader is guided by self-interest, self-gratification, grandiose, and aggressiveness. They take undue credit and blame others for their own mistakes. In most circumstances, narcissistic leadership would lead to more harm than good. However, it is important to remember that it lays the foundation for a person’s rise to power. Also, it could use unorthodox means to ensure that people are driven towards achieving organizational goals. On the contrary, covenant leadership is about serving the people. It involves forming covenant with the followers and ensuring that they are inspired to follow through its tenets. Such leaders are cognizant of the ethical responsibilities that a leader must follow. They are humble, respectful, and aware of the need to strengthen human dignity. Therefore, for a police department, covenant leadership will help in restoring the lost faith that the public had in it. It will allow for the establishment of various relationships with the community and the city government. More importantly, it will guarantee responsibility and accountability of the police. 

References 

Braun, S. (2017). Leader narcissism and outcomes in organizations: a review at multiple levels of analysis and implications for future research. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 773. 

Brunell, A. B., Gentry, W. A., Campbell, W. K., Hoffman, B. J., Kuhnert, K. W., & DeMarree, K. G. (2008). Leader emergence: The case of the narcissistic leader. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1663-1676. 

Caldwell. C. & Hassan, Z. (2016). Insights from Covenantal Leadership. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305474361_Insights_from_Covenantal_Leadership 

Camm, T. W. (2014). The dark side of leadership: Dealing with a narcissistic boss. 

Fischer, K. J. (2017). The Power of the Covenant Idea for Leadership, Reform, and Ethical Behavior. The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 10(2), 13. 

Fischer, K. J., & Schultz, J. (2016). How Does a Covenantal Approach to Developing Organizational Leadership Affect Innovation? Journal of Leadership Studies, 10(1), 53–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21444 

Hammond, J. (2013). Conscience as contract. Conscience as covenant. Faulkner Law Review 433 

King, F. (2010). Leading Cross-Culturally: Covenant Relationships for Effective Christian Leadership. Mission Studies: Journal of the International Association for Mission Studies, 27(1), 108–109. https://doi.org/10.1163/157338310X498378 

Moisan, L. (2004). Leadership is a covenant. Journal of Business Disciples, 2 (1), 1527 

Nevicka, B., De Hoogh, A. H., Den Hartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2018). Narcissistic leaders and their victims: followers low on self-esteem and low on core self-evaluations suffer most. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 422. 

Pava, M. (2015). Leading with meaning: Using covenantal leadership to build a better organization. St. Martin's Press. 

Rosenthal, S. A. (2006). Narcissism and leadership: A review and research agenda. 

Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The leadership quarterly, 17(6), 617-633. 

Valentini, C., Kruckeberg, D., & Starck, K. (2012). Public relations and community: a persistent covenant. Public Relations Review 873-879 

Xiaohong Xiao, Fengzhong Liu, Fangfang Zhou, & Silu Chen. (2018). Narcissistic Leadership and Employees’ Knowledge Sharing: Influence of Organizational Identification and Collectivism. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 46(8), 1317–1330. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7034