There are many perspectives or approaches implemented to the study and development of leadership. One particular perspective is the psychodynamic approach to leadership. The foundation of the psychodynamic approach is based in Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytical theories of human behavior. The psychodynamic approach applies the clinical paradigm to the study of leadership (Kets de Vries, 2006). The clinical paradigm is comprised of four basic premises. Premise one; there is a rationale explanation for every human action (Kets de Vries, 2006). Premise two; many of our thoughts, feelings, and motives lie outside our conscious awareness (Kets de Vries, 2006). Premise three; the way a person expresses and regulates emotion is most central to whom a person is (Kets de Vries, 2006). Premise four; we are all products of our past experiences (Kets de Vries, 2006). Thus; our past experiences and relationship themes with people; contribute to the development of behavioral response patterns during childhood. Over time behavioral consistencies will develop, rooted in our wishes, needs, and goals; our personality style (Northouse, 2016). We then unconsciously carry those dynamics that influence an individual’s behaviors into adulthood; and those behavioral dynamics will have an effect on our interactions with other people (Northouse, 2016).
Three concepts or ideas have emerged in the study of leadership through the application of the clinical paradigm to a psychodynamic approach (Northouse, 2016). Focus on the inner theatre; an individual’s past experiences in life contribute to dynamics that surround personal behavior and our personality style (Northouse, 2016). Focus on leader-follower relationships; An individual’s behavioral dynamics will affect an individual’s behavior, and how others perceive and behave toward that individual (Northouse, 2016). Focus on the shadow side of leadership; narcissism ranges from self-interest to pathological self-absorption; it provides a leader their conviction regarding the righteousness of a cause, it is either constructive or reactive (Northouse, 2016). Constructive narcissism; well balanced, positive vitality, empathetic outlook, and a capacity for introspection (Kets de Vries, Engellau, Shakespeare, Freud, Jung, & Gide, 2010). Reactive narcissism; Self-grandiosity, sense of entitlement, lack empathy, a disregard for rules and regulations (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). An individual’s particular type of narcissism is representative of the behavioral dynamics an individual acquires through childhood experiences and relationship themes.
This denotes that the behavioral dynamics of an individual’s childhood caregiver and relationship themes are a major contributing factor to developing constructive narcissism and leadership effectiveness. “When we trace narcissism to its roots; we return to a person’s infancy” (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). Adults who demonstrate constructive narcissism have consistent childhood caregivers who equally provide support and autonomy (Northouse, 2016). Caregivers who provide appropriate challenges, but do not overwhelm (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). Adults who demonstrate reactive narcissism have inconsistent childhood caregivers who are either over on under supportive or consistent caregivers who provide no autonomy (Kets de Vries et al., 2010). Caregivers that provide inconsistent stimulation, over stimulate, or under stimulate (Northouse, 2016).
Leadership research has determined the particular parenting style that contributes to a child developing constructive narcissism and leadership effectiveness. There are three types of parenting style; (Williams-Washington, Melon, & Blau, 2009). Authoritarian style is; assertive, intrusive, and restrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing an authoritarian style demand control and expect respect and compliance (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Permissive, neglectful style is; nonassertive, nonintrusive, and nonrestrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing a permissive neglectful style exercise minimal control and are minimally supportive (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Permissive, indulgent style is; nonassertive, intrusive, and nonrestrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing permissive indulgent style exercise minimal control and are very supportive (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Authoritative style is; assertive, but not intrusive or restrictive (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers implementing an authoritative style exercise control and a balance of support and autonomy (Williams-Washington et al., 2009). Children with caregivers applying an authoritative style have the best chance to emerge as leaders and to be effective leaders (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Children with caregivers applying an authoritative style are more socially competent, demonstrate self-control, and are self-reliant (Murphy, & Johnson, 2011). Caregivers who implement an authoritative style assist children in adequately resolving the narcissism tension between helplessness and the grandiose sense of self found in all children (Kets de Vries et al., 2010).
References:
Kets de Vries, M. F. (2006). The leader on the couch: A clinical approach to changing people and organizations. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Kets de Vries, M., Engellau, E., Shakespeare, W., Freud, S., Jung, C., & Gide, A. (2010, January). A clinical approach to the dynamics of leadership and executive transformation. In The Handbook of Leadership Theory and Practice: An HBS Centennial Colloquium on Advancing Leadership (pp. 183-238).
Murphy, S. E., & Johnson, S. K. (2011). The benefits of a long-lens approach to leader development: Understanding the seeds of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(3), 459–470.
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Williams-Washington, K., Melon, J., & Blau, G. M. (2009). Childhood growth and development within a family context. PsycCritiques, 54(10), 21-39.