Culture of toxic organizational leadership: Why the occurrence of so many toxic organizational leaders in Africa and Ghana

The question of Africa’s toxic leadership has taken center stage in many of the discourses of Africa’s development challenges in the twenty-first century. Studying toxic leadership from the perspective of the social construction of meaning in Africa is certainly a departure from the traditional approaches that
have come to dominate the study of leadership in Africa.

The traditional approaches that have focused on trait, situational, and contingency theories have led to dominance of leader-centered and follower-centered perspectives of leadership, with a narrow emphasis on the social construction of toxic leadership. Several leadership scholars have coined
different terms for 'bad leadership', such as destructive or toxic leadership.

Understanding the potential influence of contexts (e.g. cultural, structural, and environmental conditions) on the construction of toxic organizational leaders in sub-Saharan Africa is important for several reasons.

First, many sub-Saharan African societies are built on an in-group collectivist culture based on family ties, religious or ethnic backgrounds. As a result, leaders who are raised in these cultures would probably be influenced by how the group perceives the leader’s ability to protect the group’s interests and desires.

Second, sub-Saharan African societies are multicultural in nature, and composed of social organizations that emphasize on harmonious team work, compassion, respect, human dignity, mutual respect, personal interactions, among other factors.

our quest for finding answers to the reasons why there are so many toxic organizational leaders in sub- Saharan Africa cannot stand the test of time without taking a critical look at the context factors of toxic organizational leadership constructions and deconstructions.

I define toxic leaders as leaders that engage in egoistic behaviors, and consciously influence their followers to believe that their selfish behaviors are normal and accepted.

Also, I argue that in the context of sub-Saharan Africa, the construction of toxic leaders does not occur in a vacuum, but they are socially constructed and deconstructed in and from a context or contexts and made meaningful through the interplay between the leaders and the led, in a specific environment and
structure.

While this research alone is not sufficient to eliminate the research gaps on toxic leadership in sub- Saharan Africa, it would make an insightful and valuable impact on the causes of toxic organizational leadership, and the mechanisms that can be used to reduce the menace of toxic organizational
leadership in sub-Saharan Africa.

According to research, organizational leadership is defined as “the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organization of which they belong to”, whereas the leader is defined as a “group member whose influence on group attitudes, performance, or decision making greatly exceeds that of the average
member of the group”.

This implies that leadership is a process of social construction between one person and the group, thus, between the leader and his or her followers.

One can examine toxic leadership as a process of social construction and reconstruction. So, whatever people claim is toxic leadership, does not necessarily constitute toxic leadership. Toxic leaders are constructed and deconstructed based on the subjective meanings attributed to the interactions
between the leaders and the led, and within cultural, structural, and environmental Contexts.

To elucidate how cultural, structural, and environmental factors influence the construction of toxic leaders in sub-Saharan Africa, Mills G research noted that Africa is poor today mainly because its leaders have chosen poverty over development of its people.

This implies that most African leaders have made poor decisions that have had poisonous effects on the continent and its people. In light of this, the fundamental cause of African underdevelopment and poverty is as a result of the construction of poor and selfish decisions by some African leaders, and these
selfish and toxic decisions have had an enduring effect on their followers.

This revelation is in keeping with the postulation of the social constructivists that “people make their social and cultural worlds at the same time these worlds make them”. History has been revealed that more than five decades after independence, most African states still remained in a vicious cycle of poverty, unemployment, and underdevelopment and the cause of these problems are not only as a result of colonial invasion but by the character of destructive leadership behaviors and decisions.

Moreover, the idea that leadership is a relationship based on mutual exchange between the leader and his or her follower is a dimension worth considering in the discourse of toxic leadership.

Toxic leadership is therefore coproduced by both the leaders and their followers. This implies that the followers and the leaders can both co-construct toxic leadership behaviors.

It is argued that too often scholars within the leadership discourse attribute toxic, ineffective, or damaging leadership to the characteristics and decision-making of leaders themselves, without paying sufficient attention to the interaction between the leaders and their followers. Besides the co- construction of toxic leaders by both the leaders and the led, it is argued that leadership is embedded in a context, and the socio cultural circumstances can create an environment that allows toxic leaders to thrive.

Research revealed that many societies in sub-Saharan Africa revolve around the extended family, the immediate community, a network of interrelationships, mutual obligations, and paternalism.

There seems to be structural problems in how organizational leaders are selected or appointed within the public sector in Ghana. This is because most leaders are selected or appointed to leadership positions based on their political affiliations, ethnicity, or family relations with little regard for experience, and qualifications. That is to say, we put square pegs in round holes in most public sector organisations.

Some factors that are accountable for the occurrence of so many toxic leaders in sub-Saharan Africa are that the leaders are socially constructed or coproduced between the leaders and their followers.

Also, the influence of nepotism and patronage in the selection or appointment of organizational leaders is another factor and therefore the need to establish proper institutions, structures, and/or objective selection processes to rigorously screen potential leaders before they are appointed or selected to lead organisations.

More so, the Ghanaian culture of holding the elderly in high esteem, and believing that it is culturally not normal to criticize those in authority, and the leadership styles and policies of the leader. Leaders and those in authority should be constructively criticized and offered objective feedbacks by the led on their leadership styles and decisions.

Furthermore, Inadequate leadership training, education, and mentorship as well positive role models to emulate continue to be a problem and therefore the need for leadership education, training, and mentorship should be implemented to fill knowledge, skills, and attitude gaps in organizations.

Leaders who have shown exemplary characters, public eminence, exhibited good leadership styles and decisions should be identified and famed for the good work done.

Regionalisms are some of the major criteria used for the appointment or selection of public sector organizational leaders in Ghana. Under these conditions, experience, knowledge, skills, and the vision of the prospective leaders are not given serious consideration. As a result, most public sector
organizational leaders don’t meet the role requirements of their positions, thereby engaging in toxic behaviors and dysfunctional personal characteristics over their subordinates and the organization.

This observation is contrary to the insights the former US president Barack Obama provided on the importance of democratic institutions for good African leadership that in the twenty-first century, capable, reliable, and transparent institutions are the key to success, and this requires strong institutions such as honest public service, police force, independent judges, journalists, parliament, and a vibrant private sector and civil society.

Consequently, most state-institutions in sub-Saharan Africa are not reliable, transparent, and above all they are deficient and weak. Considering this, appointments or selection of public sector organizational leaders are compounded with weak ethical commitments and reasoning thereby creating a fertile ground for toxic leadership to thrive.

In addition, the popular saying that “like attracts like” has an underpinning in some of the reasons why there are so many toxic organizational leaders in Ghana. For instance, Ghanaian leaders who are appointed based on their regional, political, or ethnic affiliations may work to promote and protect their group’s interests. In this regard, the cultures of the organizations they represent might be influenced through the construction and reconstruction of their toxic behaviors.

Doing away with favoritism, politicization of national issues, and all respecting organizational structures would help in the processes of appointing credible leaders to leadership positions. In addition, constructive criticism and giving unbiased feedbacks to people who assumed leadership positions could help minimize the construction of destructive organizational leaders.

Extracts from the data suggest that to reach a state where there are fewer organization leaders in Ghana, much work would have to be done to improve on leadership training, education, and mentorship at homes and in schools. Hence, leadership education, training, and mentorship should be implemented to fill knowledge, skills, and attitude gaps in organizations.

It is also noted that positive leaders see a strong majority of their followers emulating them. This understanding is in keeping with the 'made side' of the leadership equation, which posits that leadership and wisdom are both made, constructed, and can be learned.

It further noted that most leaders who were apparently born to be leaders had the right genetic mix background but failed miserably as leaders because they were either unable or unwilling to learn the art of leadership.

It is recommended that leadership training, education, and mentorship should be encouraged in employees’ careers to reduce the poisonous effects of destructive organizational leadership that might cause serious harm to their organizations and followers.

In creating the tools to minimize the menace of toxic organizational leadership in Ghana, some of the participants revealed that destructive leaders could be identified, unmasked, and exposed to the general public.

We have to start exposing, naming and shaming people who abuse their positions as leaders regardless of their standing in society. Again, to promote good leadership practice in Ghana, remunerations and promotions of leadership should commensurate with leadership outcomes and meeting of set targets.