Posted on Mar 19, 2015
Where does IG draw the line. Mistreatment by a supervisor vs corrosive leadership.
5.83K
2
3
2
2
0
Ok. Lets say you felt like your boss really did not like you and what if he was impatient, easily agitated, prone to yelling and profanity at the drop of a hat. I would like to know what is the line between corrosive leadership and abuse. We will always have superiors that we don't agree with, but is a leader in the army allowed to be verbally abusive? a little help please.
Posted in these groups: IG
Toxic Leadership
Toxic Leadership
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
0
0
0
1LT To me the wrong man was promoted to the position of leadership. I never recall yelling or use of profanity while correcting anyone I ever supervised. To do so lowers the supervisors status and cost respect of the entire NCO corps. I know I don't like to be yelled at or called names for I would probably lose my job. Now I have been raked over the coals seversl time but never degraded as a person. And that was over a 38 year career between military and civilian. Hope I have helped, toxic or corrosive is never called for,
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Sir, I can only relate my experiences with IG, but as I have been informed by them when asking about topics they've always reiterated that they are there to ensure a policy is being properly enforced. In the new ADP 6-22, toxic leadership is clearly defined as,
"11. Occasionally, negative leadership occurs in an organization. Negative leadership
generally leaves people and organizations in a worse condition than when the leaderfollower
relationship started. One form of negative leadership is toxic leadership.
Toxic leadership is a combination of self-centered attitudes, motivations, and
behaviors that have adverse effects on subordinates, the organization, and mission
performance. This leader lacks concern for others and the climate of the organization,
which leads to short- and long-term negative effects. The toxic leader operates with an
inflated sense of self-worth and from acute self-interest. Toxic leaders consistently use
dysfunctional behaviors to deceive, intimidate, coerce, or unfairly punish others to get
what they want for themselves. The negative leader completes short-term requirements
by operating at the bottom of the continuum of commitment, where followers respond
to the positional power of their leader to fulfill requests. This may achieve results in
the short term, but ignores the other leader competency categories of leads and
develops. Prolonged use of negative leadership to influence followers undermines the
followers’ will, initiative, and potential and destroys unit morale." (ADP 6-22 para 1-11)
In addition, relationships between Soldiers of different rank is covered under ADP 600-35. In short, the overall theme is pretty consistent that relationships and leadership need to be built with the long term goals of an organization in mind for providing purpose, direction, and motivation. If the issue is a leader who is constantly undermining the morale and development of Soldiers, you'll need to have specific examples to illustrate that behavior. Either way, the Army is clearly changing how it views interactions between senior and subordinates, and I'd argue that the change is much needed. It's a very interesting topic once you look into it, but if I were you and interested in what IG would or could do, that's where I'd start my investigation. I hope that answered your question sir!
http://armypubs.army.mil/doctrine/DR_pubs/dr_a/pdf/adp6_22_new.pdf
http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/p600_35.pdf
"11. Occasionally, negative leadership occurs in an organization. Negative leadership
generally leaves people and organizations in a worse condition than when the leaderfollower
relationship started. One form of negative leadership is toxic leadership.
Toxic leadership is a combination of self-centered attitudes, motivations, and
behaviors that have adverse effects on subordinates, the organization, and mission
performance. This leader lacks concern for others and the climate of the organization,
which leads to short- and long-term negative effects. The toxic leader operates with an
inflated sense of self-worth and from acute self-interest. Toxic leaders consistently use
dysfunctional behaviors to deceive, intimidate, coerce, or unfairly punish others to get
what they want for themselves. The negative leader completes short-term requirements
by operating at the bottom of the continuum of commitment, where followers respond
to the positional power of their leader to fulfill requests. This may achieve results in
the short term, but ignores the other leader competency categories of leads and
develops. Prolonged use of negative leadership to influence followers undermines the
followers’ will, initiative, and potential and destroys unit morale." (ADP 6-22 para 1-11)
In addition, relationships between Soldiers of different rank is covered under ADP 600-35. In short, the overall theme is pretty consistent that relationships and leadership need to be built with the long term goals of an organization in mind for providing purpose, direction, and motivation. If the issue is a leader who is constantly undermining the morale and development of Soldiers, you'll need to have specific examples to illustrate that behavior. Either way, the Army is clearly changing how it views interactions between senior and subordinates, and I'd argue that the change is much needed. It's a very interesting topic once you look into it, but if I were you and interested in what IG would or could do, that's where I'd start my investigation. I hope that answered your question sir!
http://armypubs.army.mil/doctrine/DR_pubs/dr_a/pdf/adp6_22_new.pdf
http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/p600_35.pdf
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google