Have You Ever Met a Psychopath? The Anatomy of the Corporate Psychopath

Did you bump into a psychopath today? Ever met one? How would you know? Does the image of the killer and the shower scene in the Hitchcock movie “Psycho” come to mind? Are there more in prison or the City of London?

The concept is bandied about a lot, but there is a fascinating research history that can inform and warn those who come into contact with the psychopath at work.

In his famous book The Mask of Insanity, Cleckley (1941) first set out 10 criteria of the psychopath: superficial charm and intelligence; absence of anxiety in stressful situations; insincerity and lack of truthfulness; lack of remorse and shame; inability to experience love or genuine emotion; unreliability and irresponsibility; impulsivity and disregard for socially acceptable behaviour; clear-headedness with an absence of delusions or irrational thinking; inability to profit from experience; and lack of insight. Cleckley classed the slick but callous business person, the smooth-talking and manipulative lawyer, and the arrogant and deceptive politicians as psychopaths.

Cleckley identified 16 personality traits that, through his work with such individuals, he believed captured the essence of the psychopathic personality. They included: Superficial charm and high “intelligence”; Lack of remorse or shame; Poor judgement and failure to learn by experience; Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love; and Failure to follow any life plan.

 “Is not likely to commit major crimes that result in long prison terms. He is also distinguished by his ability to escape ordinary legal punishments and restraints. Though he regularly makes trouble for society, as well as for himself, and frequently is handled by the police, his characteristic behaviour does not usually include committing felonies which would bring about permanent or adequate restrictions of his activities. He is often arrested, perhaps one hundred times or more. But he nearly always regains his freedom and returns to his old patterns of maladjustment.” (p. 19)

Over the last 25 years, psychologists and psychiatrists have identified what have been called corporate psychopaths, white-collar psychopaths or successful psychopaths. They also go under various names such as “corporate destroyers” or “snakes in suits”.

Hare (1999), in an early chapter on white-collar psychopaths, noted how many were “trust-mongers” who, through charm and gall, obtained, then very callously betrayed, the trust of others. He noted how they make excellent imposters and how they frequently target the vulnerable. They target and exploit people’s gullibility, naivety, and Rousseauian view of the goodness of man. Cold-hearted, selfish, manipulators of all others,

he called them subcriminal psychopaths who can thrive as academics, cult leaders, doctors, police officers and writers. They violate rules, conventions and ethical standards, always just crossing legal boundaries. He also noted that there is no shortage of opportunities for psychopaths who think big.  It’s lucrative. “They are fast-talking, charming, self-assured, at ease in social situations, cool under pressure, unfazed by the possibility of being found out, and totally ruthless” (p. 121).

In another early and important study, Babiak (1995) found five characteristics of the corporate psychopath: each a) began by building a) network of one-to-one relationships with powerful and useful individuals, b) avoided virtually all group meetings where maintaining multiple facades may have been too difficult, c) created conflicts which kept co-workers from sharing information about him. d) co-workers who were no longer useful were abandoned and e) detractors were neutralised by systematically raising doubts about their competence and loyalty.

Some psychopaths can look like ideal leaders: smooth, polished, charming. They can quite easily mask their dark side – bullying, amoral, and manipulative.  In the past, it might have been politics, policing, law, media or religion that attracted psychopaths; but more and more, it is the fast-paced, exciting, glamorous world of business.

In a book entitled Corporate Psychopaths: Organisational Destroyers, Boddy (2011) described corporate psychopaths: “They seem to be unaffected by the corporate collapse they have created. They present themselves as glibly unbothered by the chaos around them, unconcerned about those who have lost their jobs, savings and investments, and lacking any regrets about what they have done. They cheerfully lie about their involvement in events, are very persuasive in blaming others for what has happened and have no doubts about their own continued worth and value. They are happy to walk away from the economic disaster that they have managed to bring about, with huge payoffs and with new roles advising governments how to prevent such economic disasters.” (p1)

He suggested that there are six identifiable outcomes of employing corporate psychopaths: a heightened level of conflict; commitment to employees plummets dramatically; heavier than necessary organisational constraints; poorer communication and a blame culture; reduced employee job satisfaction; organisational withdrawal of many good employees. He suggested that

“Corporate Psychopaths prefer to implement their self-serving plans unnoticed, but when they fear being found out, their strategy is to create chaos so that in the confusion they can avoid scrutiny and detection as the people around them in the organization concentrate on bringing order to the mess created.” (p78)

centred); Carefree non-planfulness (excessive present orientation with lack of forethought or planning); Stress immunity (experiencing minimal anxiety); Fearlessness (willing to take risks, having little concern with potentially harmful consequences), and general Cold-heartedness (unsentimental, unreactive to others’ distress, lacking in imagination).

These seem to factor into two dimensions: one related to high negative emotionality and the other to low behavioural constraint. Further research suggested two distinct facets of the psychopath: fearless dominance (glib, grandiose, deceitful, low stress) and impulsive anti-sociality (aggressive, anti-social, low control). This suggests that within the psychopath population, one may be able to distinguish between these two groups.

Dotlick and Cairo (2003) noted that the Mischievous Psychopath knows that the rules are really “only suggestions”. They are rebels without a cause, rule-breakers who believe that rules, laws and other restrictions are tedious and unnecessary. They have destructive impulses and a preference for making impulsive decisions without considering any consequences. They can, and do speak their mind, use their charms and creativity, but for no clear business goal.

How to deal with the psychopath? Easier said than done, however, Dotlick and Cairo (2003) offer four pieces of advice for what is, no doubt a successful psychopath. Encourage them to take ownership of their action and interrogate their rule-breaking, consequence-ignoring behaviours. Encourage them to think clearly about which rules they will really follow as opposed to break. They may also benefit from being on the receiving end of the sort of mischief they dish out. Finally, they may benefit from confiding in a coach.

Oldham and Morris (2000) offer ´tips on dealing with the adventurous person in your life’. “First, have fun but be careful: your partner seeks excitement through charming, disarming adventurousness.  Next, have no illusions about changing him or her: they won’t or can’t so you have to be the flexible one. Third, don’t crowd them or try to keep them on the traditional “straight and narrow’’ path. Fourth, you have to be responsible for your own safety, others’ welfare…..because they won’t be. Next, know your limits for excitement, risk, drugs, etc. because he/she will draw you into their world. Sixth, don’t expect much support and help because you are not going to get it so you need to be strong, resilient, tough. Finally, stay as sexy as you are. Keep your sexual relationship interesting and lively. Toss your inhibitions and be ready and willing to experiment” (p. 243).

It is difficult to estimate the number of successful corporate psychopaths. It is also sometimes difficult to explain how they “get away with it” for so long. However, it is no mystery when enquiring from those who do or have worked with a successful psychopath how much misery or dysfunctionality they can bring to the workplace. Psychopaths can easily get hired using charm and blatant lies. Next, they soon identify, befriend, woo and ‘‘sweet-talk’’ all the powerful “key players” in the organisation. They build these people into a support network to establish their own reputation but more importantly, to undermine their potential opponents. Next, they abandon those who have been useful to them.

Hare (1999) in his clinical study of psychopaths asks “Can anything be done?” He says nothing seems to work, precisely because psychopaths see no reason to change. Further, therapy can make them worse because it teaches them more effectively how to deceive, manipulate and use people. They learn therapy language (getting in touch with their feelings) without ever actually changing.

Hare (1999) warns those who associate with psychopaths to be aware of their power struggles and to set firm ground rules to prevent manipulation. He also advises cutting your losses: the psychopath’s appetite for power and control knows no bounds and is best left to their own devices.

They offer similar advice for the psychopathic co-worker, subordinate or client.

The term psychopath is much used but often misunderstood. Psychopathy lies on a continuum from low to high. Successful, subclinical, corporate psychopaths can be very successful at work. If they are clever and presentable, articulate and informed, their superficial charm and boldness may suit them well, particularly in business situations that are rapidly changing.