Toxic Leadership in Military Organizations: Causes and Fixes
This paper explores the nature and impact of toxic leadership within military organizations, focusing on how destructive leadership styles undermine mission command and operational effectiveness. Drawing on Reed and Olsen (2010) and Doty and Fenlason (2013), the paper defines toxic leadership as behavior driven by self-interest at the expense of subordinates' well-being and organizational climate. It identifies narcissism as a core trait of toxic military leaders and examines how it erodes motivation and unit cohesion. The paper then outlines two primary countermeasures: systemic supervision through climate assessments and 360-degree feedback, and executive coaching centered on emotional intelligence training designed to redirect leaders toward subordinate-focused behavior.
- Introduction: Leadership in Military Organizations: Good leadership qualities essential to military operations
- Defining Toxic Leadership in the Military: Toxic leaders prioritize self-interest over subordinate welfare
- Narcissism and the Human Dimension of Leadership: Narcissism erodes motivation and unit effectiveness
- Countering Toxic Leadership: Supervision and Feedback: Climate assessments and 360-degree feedback as detection tools
- Executive Coaching and Emotional Intelligence Training: Coaching and emotional intelligence redirect toxic behavior
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper moves logically from definition to diagnosis to remedy, giving it a clear problem-solution structure that is easy to follow.
- It grounds every claim in cited sources, consistently attributing arguments to Reed and Olsen (2010) and Doty and Fenlason (2013), demonstrating basic academic accountability.
- The use of specific examples — climate assessments, 360-degree feedback, and emotional intelligence coaching — prevents the argument from remaining purely abstract.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates synthesis of multiple sources around a single organizing concept. Rather than summarizing each source in turn, the writer weaves Reed and Olsen and Doty and Fenlason together across multiple paragraphs to build a unified argument about the causes and remedies of toxic leadership. This is an important undergraduate-level skill in evidence-based argumentation.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by establishing the importance of good military leadership before narrowing to the problem of toxic leaders. The second section defines toxic leadership using peer-reviewed sources. The third deepens the analysis by focusing on narcissism as the human-dimension mechanism of harm. The final two sections shift from diagnosis to prescription, outlining supervision systems and coaching interventions as practical countermeasures.
Introduction: Leadership in Military Organizations
Good leadership is an essential component of a military organization because of the complex nature of military operations. Such leadership is provided by capable leaders who can adapt to rapidly changing situations in the operational environment. Some of the components that characterize good leadership in military operations and organizations include making quality decisions, creating a positive environment for all subordinates, analytical problem solving, and systems integration. In this regard, some of the core qualities military leaders should possess include intellect, presence, character, and ability. Even though the significance of good military leaders to successful operations is widely recognized, there are toxic leaders who have negative impacts on military organizations.
Defining Toxic Leadership in the Military
Toxic leaders exist within military ranks and have negative impacts on the achievement of effective mission command. Reed and Olsen (2010) define toxic leaders as leaders who do not care for the well-being of their subordinates and who employ personal or interpersonal techniques that have negative impacts on organizational climate. Toxic leadership in military operations and organizations is characterized by subordinates' belief and conviction that the leader is motivated primarily by self-interest. Toxic leaders in the military utilize destructive leadership styles and techniques that generate a poor organizational climate and hinder both organizational and operational effectiveness.
Narcissism and the Human Dimension of Leadership
The negative impact of toxic leadership on operational and organizational effectiveness is attributable to the effect these leaders have on the human dimension of leadership. Toxic leaders affect this dimension by being narcissistic. Doty and Fenlason (2013) contend that toxic leaders are selfish, self-serving individuals who destroy the motivation of subordinates and military units. This implies that toxic leaders affect the human dimension of leadership by focusing on their own self-interests at the expense of the motivation and well-being of their subordinates.
Narcissism is considered a critical and substantial element of toxic leadership in the military, since toxic leaders tend to have an exaggerated sense of self-importance and an excessive preoccupation with themselves and their own interests (Doty & Fenlason, 2013). During this process, toxic leaders display an apparent lack of concern for the motivation, interests, and well-being of their subordinates and units. Consequently, they undermine the human element of leadership, as their personal success and satisfaction take priority over the overall success and effectiveness of the organization.
References
Doty, J. & Fenlason, J. (2013). Narcissism and toxic leaders. Military Review, 93(1), 55–60.
Reed, G. & Olsen, R. (2010). Toxic leadership: Part deux. Military Review, 90(6), 58–64.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.