This is exactly when a ‘tough boss’ becomes a toxic leader

Leaders who consider themselves merely tough bosses must realize that not everyone sees them the same way. Understanding toxic leadership is the first step toward eradicating it.

[Photo: Daniel Grizelj/Getty Images]

By Robert Logemann

4 minute Read

Toxic leadership is easy to recognize. Micromanagers hovering, petty bosses screaming, narcissists doing both, and what I call the “Godfather” personalities demanding subservience—all represent variations of the toxic leader. Appallingly, I have witnessed supposed leaders throw objects at others. We should not permit these types of people to access positions of authority.

But where do we draw the line between toxic leaders and tough bosses? Management experts and leaders themselves have studied this for decades, seeking to divine the difference. The distinction can be opaque and fluid, as what’s toxic to some might be motivating to others, and the definition of “toxic” rightly continues to be updated.

Particularly for the 21st-century workforce, in which employee engagement and mental health are top-of-mind, toxicity is a reprehensible scourge. Studies show it leads to higher rates of employee absenteeism and turnover, physical and mental health issues, and self-medication via alcohol and drugs. Toxic workplaces have cost American companies more than $220 billion, according to the Society for Human Resource Management. They also were the biggest predictors of attrition during the 2021 Great Resignation—10 times more acute than compensation issues, according to the MIT Sloan School of Management.   

Leaders who consider themselves merely tough bosses must realize that not everyone sees them the same way. Understanding toxic leadership is the first step toward eradicating it.

Defining toxic leadership

Ben Tepper, a managerial leadership expert at Ohio State University, authored the groundbreaking 2000 study “Consequences of Abusive Supervision,” in which he introduced the definition of toxic leadership: “Abusive supervision refers to subordinates’ perceptions of the extent to which supervisors engage in the sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviors, excluding physical contact.” Since then, researchers have applied this definition in studying toxic leadership and its effects on the global workforce.

Tepper’s work found that abusive leaders employ a variety of tactics (intimidation, bullying, lying, dismissiveness, disrespect, and many more) to control the workplace. Toxic leaders often retreat to these defensive devices to mask their incompetence, particularly in settings requiring expertise. Lacking such proficiency, they attempt to maintain control by creating “ambiguity and confusion” among team members and senior leaders. They also might delay or deny relevant information, which one study referred to as the “syndrome of an empty table.” They bluster without merit.

Micromanagers, narcissists, bullies, and “Godfather personalities” are toxic not just in how they treat people but in why they do so. They are toxic because they center themselves above employees and the organization. They direct everything inward. They blame, complain, and drain.

In conducting his research, Tepper asked residents of a midwestern city to evaluate their bosses. His survey featured 15 examples of toxic leadership, which respondents graded on a scale from “never” to “very often.” Among the statements Tepper asked people to consider:

• “My boss ridicules me.”
• “My boss invades my privacy.”
• “My boss blames me to save himself/herself embarrassment.”
• “My boss does not allow me to interact with my coworkers.”
• “My boss lies to me.”

The questionnaire represents a definitive how-to guide in building a toxic boss, which is why companies still use it. Leaders who listen to their teams are more likely to avoid employing, or becoming, toxic bosses. They can also sharpen their understanding of the line between tough and toxic, one that often seems blurry.

Differences between tough and toxic

I am still unsure about the term “tough boss,” since it can carry negative connotations. Tough bosses can be effective while being demanding. They set standards, hold associates accountable, correct mistakes, and are frank or “tough” at times. However, good bosses who are demanding apply the same standards to themselves as they do to their employees. That is a key distinction between tough and toxic.

Demanding bosses lead with corresponding senses of empathy, trust, and support. They communicate honestly and transparently. They demonstrate general and specific competencies in their fields. Those who lack certain skills work to acquire them. And though they stand by decisions, demanding bosses are agile enough to seek new perspectives when they are uncertain, or their information is outdated. 

And where toxic bosses seek chaos and confusion to maintain control, demanding bosses project calm. They do not use fear and intimidation to dominate the work environment. They access authority from a respect they offer and, in turn, receive. To maintain this healthy workplace, demanding bosses consistently adhere to these principles. The distance from tough but fair to toxic is short. If their empathy erodes and combativeness rises, demanding bosses can soon become toxic. Leaders must be vigilant to the signals.

How to avoid becoming a toxic boss

Though team members certainly can spot signals of toxicity, leaders sometimes miss or refuse to see them. Bosses who consider themselves tough just might be turning toxic if they demonstrate these behaviors:

• Dominating others in conversation
• Exaggerating their skills and competencies
• Fabricating stories to aggrandize themselves
• Dismissing the ideas and proposals of others
• Belittling team members and leadership
• Centering themselves above others
• Arguing incessantly and without listening
• Refusing to apologize

Leaders with strong moral compasses who find themselves deviating from their principles must course-correct immediately. Acknowledging and apologizing for their behavior represents baseline actions. Further, leaders who veer into toxicity need to recalibrate their position, communicate their next steps with associates, and refresh or pursue new strategies of effective management.

Feedback is among the most consequential deliverables leaders can provide. Employees crave it. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Gallup found that those who received frequent, meaningful feedback reported being nearly four times more engaged than those who didn’t. Employees also understand that feedback is not always positive. But if it is consistent, thoughtful, and constructive, employees will benefit. So will bosses.

Leaders grounded in their guiding principles, confident in their skills, and empathetic to their teams have no reason to turn toxic. They lead with a demanding eye, compassionate heart, and open mind.

---

Robert Logemann is the CEO of Lift Solutions Holdings.