tip off

Corporate leaders and psychopaths — what’s the difference?

Cool under pressure. Lack of empathy. Utilitarianism instincts. A new book examines the link between psychopaths and corporate leaders.

Hannibal Lecter

Some psychopaths are good guys, it can’t be denied. Like the dental surgeon who yanked out one of my molars recently. He kept wrestling it out of my bleeding gums despite the tears rolling down my face. I needed that guy to keep going when no one else could have. I couldn’t expect him to be the one giving me a pat and a cup of tea afterwards.

Corporate leaders are often accused of being psychopaths. This is in part because a 2005 study by two researchers at the University of Surrey who compared the psychopathic profiles of business managers with psychiatric patients and hospitalised criminals. “Their analysis revealed that a number of psychopathic attributes were actually more common in business leaders than in so-called ‘disturbed’ criminals ..,” wrote author Kevin Dutton, in his book, The Wisdom of Psychopaths.

The difference between business leaders and the criminals or insane, the study found, was the level of “antisocial” feelings.

Dutton’s provocatively-titled book posits the theory that we can learn lessons by studying the qualities exhibited by psychopaths and he crosses the world talking to researchers and experts, as well as with psychopathic criminals, to investigate his proposition.

What is clear at the end of Dutton’s exploration is that psychopathy occupies a kind of sliding scale. In some circumstances, we all see values in these attributes; but once the tendency tips past a certain point, the individual is lost in a moral vacuum, without concern for their victims. It is dangerous territory to explore.

No matter the discomfort of the analogy: leaders are already closer in behaviour to psychopaths than most. When asked to complete a self-score psychopathy scale, CEOs topped the list of those on the plus-side. They were followed by lawyers, television and radio presenters, salespeople, surgeons, journalists, police officers, clerics, chefs and civil servants. Here’s just a snapshot of what leaders can learn from psychopaths.

It’s hard to make a psychopath sweat. The higher the stakes, the bigger the risk, the more they love the game. In a study when a mix of participants gambled away $20 they were given, the psychopaths won easily. In the game, losing cost a dollar, but winning reaped $2.50. Normal people became increasingly cautious as they suffered loss. The psychopaths thrived on the risk.

This attribute is in part because psychopaths feel little or no empathy for other human beings. They tend to sacrifice the few for the many — a familiar theme for those who have been through redundancy rounds.

Cool under pressure and a lack of empathy are useful traits in moderation: you don’t want a surgeon worrying how you feel as he or she takes a scalpel to your brain. The best leaders, like psychopaths, actually calm down when thrown into a highly stressful situation.

When applied to psychopaths, charisma is a superficial thing — the process of winning our admiration is a game for them that has no more meaning than brushing their teeth.

In these days of authentic leadership, leaders might want to at least study what makes psychopaths so irresistible. After all, military leaders need to be able to persuade their troops to walk into the face of death.

Persuading followers to do what must be done requires charm, an ability to understand what motivates and drives individuals. Dutton describes a psychopathic school friend who tricked him out of school assignment, but who also persuaded Dutton’s mother to let the pair see in the New Year. “‘Mrs Dutton,’ Johnny said with icy reason. ‘You don’t want us running around at the crack of dawn tomorrow morning while you’re lying in bed with a headache, do you?’

By the way, if you think your leader might be a real psychopath, most people report feeling extreme discomfort talking one on one with a true psychopath. Although they are brilliant at covering their complete lack of feeling, most normal people (more women than men) get an icy chill — feelings of disgust or repulsion, or that “they might be lunch”.

The capacity to think so far ahead, to see opportunity that is invisible to others, to understand the secret desires of others (a market) sounds as much like a description of Steve Jobs as it does of the Yorkshire Ripper.

The best leaders are way ahead, not only able to see the best path, but to communicate their vision with clarity and passion, enlist the support of everyone around them, stay focused on the goal and thrive on making all the tough decisions needed to get there — just like Hannibal Lecter.

Why is the world inhabited by psychopaths? Dutton suggests that these attributes have been preserved through the evolutionary sieve. They are great survivors, the superlative hunters of the cave days, the corporate elite of today. And, since most psychopaths are men, they also have a breeding advantage: sleeping with many women, but not sticking around to be called “daddy”, as Dutton explains.

As far away from our ideals as we think the psychopath is, Dutton points out that they share many traits with the most spiritual among us (and also have traits at the opposite end of the spectrum, of course). Stoicism, mindfulness, mental toughness, openness to experience, utilitarianism, focus, altered states of consciousness, energy, creativity, and non-attachment.

*This article was originally published at LeadingCompany

16
  • 1
    SBH
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    psychopathy occupies a kind of sliding scale” really? well bugger me, I thought we could just label people one thing or another and be done with it

  • 2
    Hamis Hill
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    If, as the father of economics Adam Smith argued entirely mathematically, 236 years ago, capitalists do have an interest to deceive and oppress the public, then wouldn’t psychopaths make the perfect managers for the “Idle Rich”?
    Why, after all this time, would anyone find this surprising?
    Is suppressing any modern inquiry(as part of the school curriculum for instance?) into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations part of the econo-socio-psychopathology of modern captitalism?
    Capitalists have an interest to dumb down the citizenry, the easier to deceive and oppress them?
    For example, the reduced spending on education under the Howard regime, well Duh! everyone can tell that has nothing to do with higher learning producing higher salaries, higher savings and lower interest rates.Right??
    In former times Chambers of commerce representing financial interests maintained a separation from Chambers of industry because, for the former, higher profits only came on the back of lower wages while captains of industry, like Henry Ford ( a bit of a psychopath?) knew that high wages created a demand for manufactured goods.
    Chambers of Commerce and Industry, in modern times have become captive to commercial interests at the expense of industry.
    The psychopaths at work? Work Choices and low wages anyone?
    No sound of pennies dropping?
    Or is it that the “commentariat” already understand all these economic truisms from the Ages of Enlightenment and find them all too, too tedious to repeat?

  • 3
    Matthew of Canberra
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    Insert derisive and dismissive response here.

    Chuckle about the things that people do go on about.

  • 4
    AsGrayAs
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

    Actually, I think the label ‘psychopath’ is being kind. Sociopaths are FAR more dangerous (unpredictable, remorseless, utterly ruthless), and the definition of sociopathy aligns more closely with the idea we have of the Megalomaniac. That being the ‘classic’ power-hungry uber-rich, win-at-all-costs type.
    Feel free to check out http://shitsgottastop.wordpress.com/2012/11/24/narcissistic-billionaires/ for an unqualified simpleton’s perspective on the current breed of outspoken wealthy narcissists.

  • 5
    Will Arnott
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    I’m with Matthew

  • 6
    POV 888
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    Interesting article thanks. I can relate this to the premier of Queensland’s MO!

    I’ve read ‘Working with Monsters’ by Dr John Clarke in an attempt to understand the ‘culture’ of a previous workplace…it’s now a cold case!

  • 7
    Andybob
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

    Perhaps the more pertinent questions are which of our corporate leaders lack appropriate masking traits that might otherwise cloak their pschopathic tendencies from general examination and what medications are appropriate to redress same, with names and positions held included.

  • 8
    klewso
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

    Pay”?

  • 9
    Mk8adelic
    Posted Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

    Exhibit 1 r Murdoch?

  • 10
    Steve777
    Posted Thursday, 6 December 2012 at 12:17 am | Permalink

    A survey of history reveals that most of the Kings, Conquerors and so-called ‘great men’ (and they were mostly men) over the ages were clearly psychopaths, who single-mindedly pursued power, ruthlessly eliminating rivals along the way, including close family. The big prize? Well those who got to the top could in effect have a harem, whatever the wider religious or social constraints of the time and place or whatever it was called (e.g. ‘the fine ladies of the court’). That’s why psychopaths have survived through the evolutionary sieve.

    A big advantage of capitalism? Well, the super alpha males become CEOs rather than warlords.

    The difference between business leaders and the criminals or insane, the study found, was the level of “antisocial” feelings…”. Or maybe, as Salvadore Dali opined, “The only difference between myself and a madman is that I’m not mad”.

  • 11
    nullifidian
    Posted Thursday, 6 December 2012 at 12:53 am | Permalink

    What are these “just so” stories about the evolutionary advantage of psychopathy meant to demonstrate? That psychopaths are simply part of normal human variation and that they play, as this article seems to imply, an important role in the economy? Do we really want to see more organisations like Enron, and more masters of the universe?

  • 12
    silentmajority
    Posted Thursday, 6 December 2012 at 4:56 am | Permalink

    . I’ve seen my fair share of corporate psycho’s. To the point where in interviews I ask to meet EVERYBODY including the top johnny and all his underlings and I assess THEM and point out that I’m not even interested in working with them if anyone shows psychopathic tendencies.
    I emphasise that my values are honesty, integrity and diligence.
    It works a treat. If I don’t get a position with them I don’t care because I’ve saved myself a lot of trouble in the long run because a psycho won’t take a second look at you if you show you’re prepared to call him out from the very beginning.

  • 13
    UTS LIBRARY
    Posted Thursday, 6 December 2012 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    I hope this bloke wasn’t paid for this load of pscho-bullshit.Publishing this low class drivel isn’t going to bring too many new subscribers. Not encouraging old subscribers.

  • 14
    dropBear
    Posted Friday, 7 December 2012 at 8:18 am | Permalink

    flavor of the month psychobabble.

  • 15
    Posted Friday, 7 December 2012 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    What did I just read?

  • 16
    paul.rupil
    Posted Tuesday, 11 December 2012 at 1:28 pm | Permalink

    Haven’t you see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation_(film) ?

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...