Toxicity: Let’s Finally Do Something About It!

Praise for Toxicity

"This transparent and authentic exploration of a timely and critical topic is exceptional. So often toxic leaders are very good at stake holder management or in other words, disguising their detrimental self serving behaviors behind a facade that they present to senior leadership, enabling them to control the narrative and operate incognito. Toxicity provides an accessible playbook that helps identify these destructive traits and enables real change for organizations that are looking for sustainable, repeatable practices based on psychological safety and trust that will build a healthy, thriving company culture wherever they are practiced."

Dan Merrill - General Manager, LEGO Education

Too often people just take it. They explain away the bad behavior and the toxic leadership, not even realizing it’s WRONG. Hughes masterfully defines toxic leadership and provides guidance on how to manage it and eliminate from your organization!

Dr. Joe Allen – Professor of Occupational Health Psychology, University of Utah

An accurate depiction (of toxicity) that was very apparent in many of the acquisitions I’ve lead throughout my 30 plus years in leadership. Extremely insightful and absolutely critical in removing a toxic work environment. An excellent read.

Bruce Wren – COO, SAS AirCare

"As ethical servant leaders our mandate is to leave the company (and people within the company) better for our stewardship. Bryan’s Culture Recovery Framework is a strong tool in the toolkit towards this end and worthy of reflective consideration."

Patrick Brensinger – Former President of a $2B+ Service Company

Toxic leadership is a topic that everyone talks about, but no one wants to confront. This book tackles it head on with symptoms, diagnosis, and a path to recovery. A must read for those committed to organizational excellence!

Jeff Hornberger – CEO, Residential Real Estate Council

TOXICITY: Let’s Finally Do Something About It!

Published by Clear Day Publishing

Bountiful, Utah, U.S.A.

Copyright ©2024, BRYAN C. HUGHES. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems without permission in writing from the publisher/author, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review. All images, logos, quotes, and trademarks included in this book are subject to use according to trademark and copyright laws of the United States of America.

HUGHES, BRYAN C., Author

TOXICITY

BRYAN C. HUGHES

Library of Congress Control Number: 2024919967

ISBN: 979-8-9915541-0-7, 979-8-9915541-2-1 (paperback)

ISBN: 979-8-9915541-3-8 (hardcover)

ISBN: 979-8-9915541-1-4 (digital)

BUSINESS & ECONOMICS / Organizational Behavior

BUSINESS & ECONOMICS / Workplace Culture

BUSINESS & ECONOMICS / Human Resources & Personnel Management

Ghostwriter: Danielle Harward (harwardwriting.com)

Book Design: Heidi Caperton (heidicaperton.com)

Publishing Management: Susie Schaefer (finishthebookpublishing.com)

QUANTITY PURCHASES: Schools, companies, professional groups, clubs, and other organizations may qualify for special terms when ordering quantities of this title. For information, email [email protected]

All rights reserved by BRYAN C. HUGHES and CLEAR DAY PUBLISHING.

This book is printed in the United States of America.

To those who have been impacted by toxicity, or have witnessed toxicity, and are committed to a different way. Cheers to you!

Table of Contents

Introductionx

Part 1

Breaking Traditional Patterns

1. Shift In Mindset

2. Toxic Leadership

3. Effects and Consequences of Toxic Leadership

4. Ethical Leadership

Part 2

Prepare and Reset

5. Conditions for Culture Improvement

6. Culture Recovery Framework—Organizational Accountability

7. Culture Recovery Framework—Individual Accountability

8. Culture Recovery Framework—Individual Trust

9. Culture Recovery Framework—Organizational Trust

Part 3

Sustainable Healing

10. Intention Is Required

11. Case Management Function

Conclusion

Acknowledgments

References

About the Author

Associate:

More commonly known as an employee, this is an individual who is hired by an organization, or perhaps a volunteer, to achieve common goals. Though employees isn’t necessarily a negative word, the word associates reminds me—and hopefully anyone reading this book—that we all deserve respect.

Follower:

Follower, in this book, is referring to the psychological relationship someone may have with a leader. Toxic, or otherwise.

Introduction

The great resignation was poorly named. Rather, we all experienced something that I believe should be recognized as the great reevaluation .

The switch to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic gave associates more choices than ever. They were no longer geographically bound to their employers, and they were no longer required to endure environments and the consequences of toxic cultures and leadership. This sparked a wave of departures from environments that failed to foster growth or respect.

In wake of this change, one of the most pressing challenges in corporate America has become associate retention. Yet, even though this is a focal point of discussion, many among executive leadership and human capital practitioners don’t know how to address toxic leadership, heal from it, and adjust their culture so that toxic leaders no longer drive their best talent away. In fact, it might be the reason you picked up this book!

Many executives have tried to sell a specific bill of goods to candidates in the talent acquisition process (family environment, development, promotional opportunities) to attract top talent. They hope that this, in part, will help them overcome the toxicity that seems to continually take shape in their companies. However, they often don’t make good on those promises. Instead, they only maintain a transactional relationship of trading hours and tasks in return for pay, leaving the associates to fumble in the wake of toxicity and wonder what happened to all those promises made at the door. Today, individuals are more inclined to move their ladder against another building if they don’t feel those promises have been met or if their development is blocked by a toxic leader.

How do we fix this problem? By addressing the removal and recovery of toxic leaders, and by creating an accountable culture that prevents them from forming in the first place.

Operational excellence in any organization requires a culture of accountability. It should be normalized and integrated into every facet of the organizational framework. In many companies, however, there is a marked absence of accountability culture, both at the organizational and individual levels. Where leaders are as accountable to the associates as the associates are to them. In the absence of this mutual accountability, toxicity builds.

Pushing for operational excellence in the absence of an accountability culture inherently creates a toxic culture, where individuals may feel they need to engage in deviant behaviors to accomplish the goals set before them. This stems from a lack of clear expectations and high demands in the absence of a robust feedback loop, making the only clear measure of success the completion of tasks within specific timeframes. When this pressure is not balanced with an accountability culture and ethical guidelines, the stage is set for a breakdown in integrity and safety. This endangers associate well-being and jeopardizes the organization’s operational reputation. It fosters a culture where the ends justify the means, which is a direct pathway to ingrained toxic behavior.

Yet, many leaders don’t hold themselves accountable to their associates, and might not even hold their associates accountable! In my experience, much of this lack of accountability stems from a misapplication of the servant leadership model. While servant leadership emphasizes the importance of serving others, it should not preclude holding individuals accountable for their performance. Unfortunately, in practice, this leadership style is often overused to the extent that it avoids necessary feedback. Leaders, wary of losing staff, may hesitate to enforce standards or provide feedback at all. When terminations become necessary, these same leaders often find themselves hamstrung by insufficient documentation or a lack of validated coaching.

Sadly, in my academic research and professional practice, I have found many terminated associates report in exit interviews that their first real coaching session occurred only shortly before their termination! In an effort to avoid the risk of being sued for wrongful termination—due to lack of a paper trail—human capital and operational leaders may opt to keep the associate on, which allows the behaviors to fester and is seen by others as an approval.

All of this deeply affects a company’s culture and creates a prime breeding ground for toxicity. Organizations attempt to remedy these failures with superficial measures such as hosting social events like pizza parties, tweaking compensation plans, or conducting associate surveys with basic questions like Would you recommend working here? or Do you feel like you are heard? to try and gauge how associates feel about those they report to, without following up with sufficient measures to improve conditions.

While these initiatives are not inherently flawed, their implementation lacks depth. This is especially true because prestige-driven toxic leaders can artificially inflate survey scores by incentivizing positive feedback or by using threats and guilt to silence dissent. This manipulation can lead to a skewed understanding of associate satisfaction and organizational culture by executive leadership. Those associates who doubt themselves may score the organization higher out of fear or pressure, while dissenters may opt out of completing the survey altogether due to a lack of trust.

Unfortunately, in many organizations, not only do these challenges exist, but they are the status quo.

Then executive leadership becomes frustrated when toxicity continues to appear. What’s worse, if they do get rid of a toxic leader, they sweep the termination under the rug because they are embarrassed such toxic leaders occurred under their watch. They don’t help the teams affected heal from the toxicity, and they don’t take steps to stop future toxicity.

If you remove a toxic leader, yet don’t make any cultural changes, you haven’t stopped toxicity. Just like when you try to lose weight, you can jog all the time, but if you don’t adjust your diet to healthier foods, you won’t see any changes. The book Good to Great, by Jim Collins, introduced the Flywheel Effect.¹ This is the idea that successful organizational momentum takes time and many small acts. And once the momentum—through these small progressive acts—is established, it becomes a continuous cycle of success for the company. An organization may remove a toxic leader and do nothing else while often believing they are adding to the momentum of the flywheel. Yet they aren’t. They are more likely only running on a hamster wheel instead, exerting tremendous effort without making any real progress.

All this to say, whether you are operating within the tech industry on the West Coast, manufacturing in the Midwest, or finance on the East Coast, the challenges of toxic leadership and the mainstream tactics to overcome it (which don’t typically work), remain consistent. Toxicity can manifest in any company. It knows no boundaries. Even in scenarios where overtly toxic leaders are not present, an organizational framework that fails to curb negative influences can create an environment ripe for toxicity, and toxicity has a high opportunity cost for your company.

Organizations spend considerable resources managing dismissals and replacements. When toxicity breeds deviant behaviors such as fraud, theft, manipulation, and triangulation, these costs only increase. Not to mention the obvious legal repercussions that could come from these behaviors. Plus, cultures full of toxicity will stifle innovation. Especially if the culture becomes one where credit is the central focus, associates might withhold their innovative ideas, fearing they won’t receive due recognition. Or worse, they may leave the organization to seek an environment that they believe will deliver greater value and encouragement of their contributions.

There is an ethical and operational advantage to addressing toxicity. But you must commit to making the change, and