Is a Narcissistic Boss an Asset or a Liability for a Company — and Why Doesn’t Research Agree? A New Meta-Analysis Investigates
The fate of companies is often linked to the personalities of their leaders. What personality traits do they tend to have, and to what extent is the character of top managers truly reflected in a company’s performance? This question concerns not only the public but also researchers. One frequently discussed trait is narcissism. Some studies suggest that managers with narcissistic traits may benefit their companies, while others consider them more of a liability. Why do scientists disagree on whether narcissistic CEOs are beneficial for companies — and which conclusion is closer to the truth? A new meta-analysis by three researchers from the Faculty of Business Administration at the Prague University of Economics and Business set out to address this issue.
While narcissists are generally not perceived positively in everyday life, numerous scientific studies suggest that in corporate leadership their personality traits may have advantages with an overall positive impact on company performance. “Some studies claim that narcissists lead companies to higher profits or that they are better able to cope with crisis situations,” says Daniela Pauknerová, Head of the Department of Managerial Psychology and Sociology.
However, there is also no shortage of studies arguing that the negatives associated with narcissism outweigh the positives they may bring to an organization. “They point, for example, to tendencies toward manipulation, overburdening employees, and generally a higher likelihood of creating a toxic work environment,” Pauknerová adds.
When Scientists Disagree, It’s Necessary to Find the Cause
The often contradictory conclusions and the various methods used to measure narcissism in existing studies prompted Pavlína Honsová, Aleš Kubíček, and Daniela Pauknerová to conduct a meta-analysis aimed at determining whether a reliable conclusion can be drawn from the existing body of research. The trio compared 124 studies published over the past twenty years. The result?
“Based on the available data, it is not possible to clearly determine whether corporate leaders with narcissistic personality traits have a positive or negative impact on company performance,” says Aleš Kubíček from the Department of Strategy, who specializes in meta-analyses. According to him, this may be due to the wide range of methods used to identify narcissistic traits as well as the very different ways their impact on companies has been measured.
However, the issue may not lie solely in methodological differences or in the specific tests used to assess narcissistic traits. According to co-author and psychologist Pavlína Honsová, many studies have relied on unreliable methods to identify narcissists. These include indirect measures such as assessing narcissistic traits based on the size of a CEO’s signature or the amount of space they occupy in annual reports. Yet even studies using the widely applied Narcissism Index — which Honsová notes also has its weaknesses — have failed to produce consistent conclusions across research.
“Based on our meta-analysis, it is important to realize that contradictory findings do not necessarily stem from the idea that the impact of narcissistic leaders always differs case by case. They may instead arise because science still lacks an easily accessible yet reliable method for measuring narcissism among top managers,” Honsová explains. Moreover, she emphasizes that narcissism is not a single, uniform trait but has different forms and intensities. “For example, we can distinguish between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. These differ in how they manifest outwardly,” she notes.
Strong Crisis Managers, Weaker Team Players
Nevertheless, according to Pauknerová, certain recurring patterns can be observed in existing scientific findings. “Instead of asking the simple question of whether narcissistic traits overall help or harm companies, it makes more sense to examine in which situations and through which mechanisms the typical behaviors of such leaders influence organizational functioning,” she argues.
The positives, she says, may stem from heightened self-confidence, courage, and decisiveness, which are often associated with narcissistic traits. “What may present problems in personal life can be an advantage in business — for example, when pushing through innovations or in crisis situations that require swift and decisive action,” Pauknerová explains.
“However, a narcissistic personality is a double-edged sword. Courage and self-confidence can easily turn into excessive risk-taking. There is also often a tendency to prioritize one’s own image at the expense of the company and to ignore feedback,” she adds.
According to Pauknerová, both in science and in practice it is unwise to rely on simple personality tests and quick, intuitive judgments when evaluating a person. When selecting someone for a leadership position, it is advisable to combine multiple methods to provide a more comprehensive and balanced picture of how a candidate makes decisions, works with people, and handles pressure.
Caution is also warranted when assessing current leaders. “Just because someone is charismatic and self-confident does not automatically mean they are beneficial to the company in the long term,” Pauknerová concludes.