6 ms·

Isn't narcissism among those who rise to an executive rank at some point in their career more the norm rather than the exception?

• warent 7y ago
  I've always thought that was more of a meme/rumor than actual fact. It seems unlikely to me that the average executive is somebody with a fragile ego that lacks empathy. From my perspective it can't be the case. The executives I've worked with have always been powerful teammates with great listening/communication skills. Maybe I'm just lucky?
  • jjtheblunt 7y ago
    I'm also lucky, then.
  • rriepe 7y ago
    Narcissists conduct abuse within intimate (romantic, familial or very close friends) relationships. Outside of those relationships, they're typically very well-behaved and even adored.
    • xiaolingxiao 7y ago
      could you expand on this? why do they do this?
      • deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      • rriepe 7y ago
        I'm an emotional philosopher, not a psychologist. But here's my take: There are two fundamental arguments of the self: additive and subtractive. The additive argument is called love. It tells us to add to the self. The subtractive argument is called disgust. It tells us to remove from the self. Codependents are addicted to the chemical rewards of love, while narcissists are addicted to the chemical rewards of disgust. Narcissists therefore have an overwhelming need to eject things as "not good enough" from their extended self. If I tell a stranger his haircut looks stupid, I don't get a disgust reward. If I tell my son that, I do get the reward because he is part of my extended self. Basically, narcissists have extremely high standards for themselves. They want to become fast friends because they want (need, really) to share that terrible burden.
        • friendlybus 7y ago
          Narcissists don't have a real self, they have a developed mask that sits on top of it. Usually developed in childhood for a parent. You can't police feelings into evidence of pathology. Some people are more disgust sensitive than others. There is light and dark to everything, including love and disgust.
          • rriepe 7y ago
            The mask is a metaphor. I'm talking about real things. If you're addicted to a feeling then that is a pathology. You're right that love and disgust can both be good or bad, but nobody said otherwise.
            • friendlybus 7y ago
              The mask is a real thing. >You're right that love and disgust can both be good or bad, but nobody said otherwise You did when you made disgust a fundamental negative and love a fundamental positive. But whatever. >If you're addicted to a feeling then that is a pathology. Not necessarily, some people deliberately go through bad feelings for the sake of getting to the bottom of something and integrating that answer. That can seem like an addiction from the outside. You do you.
              • rriepe 7y ago
                No, the mask is an abstract metaphor. I said subtractive and additive. Chiseling is subtractive. Do you think chiseling is fundamentally negative? What point are you trying to make with your "bad feelings" comment? That narcissists are actually fiercely introspective? What are you even on about? You say "You do you" but you're the one who butted in. Next time, first know what you're talking about.
                • friendlybus 7y ago
                  Nobody knows where feelings come from, what makes them real and but not a mask, a behaviour people can embody? They are both real. You said: "There are two fundamental arguments of the self" You conflated criticizing haircuts with a disgust reward and constructed a view on narcissists that is defined by feelings nearly everyone feels. Your view on feelings is too limited to identify a narcissist, as demonstrated by the idea that you can go through feelings and appear to be an addict from outside, but not be one. Butted in to what? A public thread? The mask idea comes from psychology. A narcissist suffers narcissitic wounds at an early age and learns to develop a false persona to please abusive parents instead of a healthy self that grows over time. They stay locked in a cycle of abuse trying to escape past trauma instead of dealing with it and it is unleashed on those around them when the tension becomes too much. They frequently rely on charm and a single talent to get them achievements to please said relationship and are found to be brittle or liars when challenged. They will suck the life-force out of others to fuel their own lack of a self. There is a whole bunch of psychological information on this. This all has an overlap with the external version of the story, the narcissus myth. Narcissus is a spirit that embodies the story of self love, being so captivating to some. He has multiple outcomes. In one he captures the attention of another so completely that their life becomes drained away and the adorer becomes no more than an echo in a forest, which mirrors the fueling the self & abuse cycle from psychology. In another part he sees his reflection in a pool and becomes unable to leave his own reflection and eventually suicides or recognizes that the love cannot be reciprocated and becomes a flower, which mirrors a lot of the empathy focused therapy techniques.
      • friendlybus 7y ago
        Read Malignant Self Love by Sam Vaknin and come to your own conclusions. The discussion in this post is fairly shallow. Pushing the requirement to judge character into a few key signs is not really going to work.
  • dec0dedab0de 7y ago
    If you're considering them teammates then maybe you're not seeing them for who they are. The negative behavior only comes out when they have direct power over you, and doesnt really get bad until they know you won't retaliate.
    • bitL 7y ago
      I still remember one of my first managers that seemed like a nice person who went absolutely psychopathic during 1-on-1 when nobody else was in the office that day, attempting to completely destroy me, perked with wonderful statements like "your performance doesn't matter for your career progression", "you can't do anything about it", "I can do whatever I want to you", "it's for the company (i.e. him = company)". All after I solved their main problems within my first few months and laid groundwork for their next successful product. Later I learned there was some internal clique of people pushing each other forward and I was considered a threat - at that time I was pretty naïve, one could tell idealistic after achieving academic excellence at top schools, believing in "innate goodness" of people (LOL). Now that person is a senior director at Google. Good luck to anyone affected! I am still thinking I should have destroyed him back then and stop the tumor right in the beginning...
      • zozbot234 7y ago
        > Now that person is a senior director at Google. No surprise there. A fish rots from the head down.
• OnlineGladiator 7y ago
  A more interesting question is how do you separate narcissism from idealism in a startup founder? I mean it takes a certain type of person to defy the world against all odds. Sometimes you end up with someone like Elizabeth Holmes, and sometimes you end up with someone like Yvon Chouinard.
  • Spooky23 7y ago
    The easiest test is to go out to eat and see how they treat the waitress.
    • OnlineGladiator 7y ago
      I've always considered this the worst possible test. Anyone remotely concerned with their image wouldn't openly treat a waitress poorly in front of company, because they know that company is observing them. If anything, this is the kind of test I'd think a narcissist would propose in order to make themselves look better.
  • zozbot234 7y ago
    Intellectual/social/cultural/artsy etc. curiosity is a very nice test that's not too easy to "fake". Narcissists just don't seem to care that much about the outside world; maybe that also requires a kind of empathy they do not have.
    • philwelch 7y ago
      For example, consider Steve Jobs. I think you could reasonably describe him as being self-centered, egotistical, and mean. In some ways he superficially resembles many descriptions of narcissism; he even had a similar type of charisma that many successful narcissists share. Except by all accounts, he actually did care passionately about lots of things in the outside world, he cared about music and art and design and beauty. I think fundamentally, rather than being a narcissist, he cared entirely too much about certain things to an unhealthy degree. I don't think it's helpful to lose your temper, but whereas a narcissist will lose his temper when it comes to his own ego, Steve Jobs lost his temper when it came to the world around him not living up to the high standards he was trying to hold everything to. And, not coincidentally, Steve Jobs was a successful startup founder regardless of his personality flaws.
• Spooky23 7y ago
  It depends on the organization. I’ve worked in places where executives had to be narcissistic or sociopaths just to survive. People with intact emotions have difficulty coping with the toxicity. Most places aren’t like that.
  • K0SM0S 7y ago
    > had to Nonetheless chose to in the first place, insofar as nobody's forcing anyone to climb the exec ladder, and there are lots of places to do it — in fact, it requires several in a career usually, to reach the highest ranks, unless it's a familial-type affair. “God laughs at those who deplore the effects of which causes they cherish.” (Bossuet) I have this general KPI for myself: if it makes me become a worse human being, then it's bad for me, thus I should either run away the other direction, or buckle up and change things. It can't be ignored or 'endured' for it's the 'bad' kind of pain, the kind that doesn't make you grow but just eats at you. The kind that commands you to fight or flee but certainly not freeze. And you're right, most places aren't like that. I never forget that >90% of businesses in most rich countries employ less than 10 people. Also know that in an average crowd, there are likely between 3% and 15% sociopaths depending on who you ask, 1 in 10, likely much more in achievers' social circles (because sociopaths are fundamentally not average statistically and tend to outperform the rest of us). Now you just have to look at your reality and map these numbers. The mediocrity principle probably applies to most of us.
• fuzzfactor 7y ago
  >bold vision, extreme self-confidence, and determination to win These are not narcissistic characteristics on their own. More like positive attributes on their own. OTOH >They tend to seek power and they are very good at convincing the people above them that they deserve it. >entitlement, hostility when challenged, and a willingness to manipulate — are seen as part of the package. These are not positive attributes, instead they are characteristics narcissists use to create a facade of the former. When you accept the latter as part of a supposedly worthwhile package you are not doing a careful enough evaluation. Plus >Isn't narcissism among those who rise to an executive rank at some point in their career more the norm rather than the exception? Common enough to have given rise to the stereotype. The damage depends on the organization. When _People Are Our Biggest Asset_ the loss in value can be more devastating than resource-oriented or hard-asset companies, even when growth appears visible, the unrealized possibilities can be more significant than shareholder returns in a capitalist venture.