Search results

This research aims to examine the influence of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) dark triad traits, follower COVID-19 anxiety and self-leadership on follower evaluations of the effectiveness of organizations’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.

In this paper data were collected over two time periods. At time 1, mid-October 2021, 650 participants responded to questions on their CEO’s leadership traits and self-leadership. At time 2, (3-week lag) 275 matched individual responses provided followers’ evaluations of the effectiveness of the organization’s COVID-19 response and follower self-leadership.

CEO dark triad traits had direct and indirect negative effects on followers’ evaluations of the organization’s COVID-19 response (through COVID-19 anxiety). Follower self-leadership mitigated the negative effects.

By examining the moderating role of self-leadership, we can offer organizations evidence-based strategies to mitigate some harmful effects of leaders exhibiting dark triad traits.

Given that organizations are still dealing with the ongoing ramifications of COVID-19 and planning for future crises, our findings emphasize the negative effects of dark traits on COVID-19 anxiety, and in turn, on follower’s evaluation of effective organization response to a crisis, highlighting the importance of top-level leader selection.

Our results bolster Manz’s (1986) argument that self-leadership might be key to achieving peak performance in organizations and important for follower well-being.

This study of dark traits is especially important in a crisis context to understand how leaders affect followers’ perceptions about organizational outcomes and factors that might mediate or moderate the negative impact. Despite interest in understanding leadership during a crisis, the majority of research is focused on positive traits of leaders (Palmer et al., 2020).

The purpose of this paper is to update the core data set of self-neglect safeguarding adult reviews (SARs) and accompanying thematic analysis. The initial data set was published in this journal in 2015 and has since been updated annually. The complete data set is available from the author. The second purpose is to reflect on the narratives about adult safeguarding and self-neglect by focusing on the stories that are told and untold in the reviews.

Further published reviews are added to the core data set, drawn from the national SAR library and the websites of Safeguarding Adults Boards (SABs). Thematic analysis is updated using the domains used previously, direct work, the team around the person, organisational support and governance. SAR findings and recommendations are also critiqued using three further domains: knowledge production, explanation and aesthetics.

Familiar findings emerge from the thematic analysis and reinforce the evidence-base of good practice with individuals who self-neglect and for policies and procedures with which to support those practitioners working with such cases. SAR findings emphasise the knowledge domain, namely, what is actually found, rather than the explanatory domain that seeks to answer the question “why?” Findings and recommendations appear to assume that learning can be implemented within the existing architecture of services rather than challenging taken-for-granted assumptions about the context within which adult safeguarding is situated.

A national database of reviews completed by SABs has been established (www.nationalnetwork.org.uk), but this data set remains incomplete. Drawing together the findings from the reviews nonetheless reinforces what is known about the components of effective practice, and effective policy and organisational arrangements for practice. Although individual reviews might comment on good practice alongside shortfalls, there is little analysis that seeks to explain rather than just report findings.

Answering the question “why?” remains a significant challenge for SARs, where concerns about how agencies worked together prompted review but also where positive outcomes have been achieved. The findings confirm the relevance of the evidence-base for effective practice, but SARs are limited in their analysis of what enables and what obstructs the components of best practice. The challenge for SAR authors and for partners within SABs is to reflect on the stories that are told and those that remain untold or untellable. This is an exercise of power and of ethical and political decision-making.

The paper extends the thematic analysis of available reviews that focus on work with adults who self-neglect, further reinforcing the evidence base for practice. The paper analyses the degree to which SARs answer the question “why?” as opposed simply to answering the question “what?” It also explores the degree to which SARs appear to accept or challenge the context for adult safeguarding. The paper suggests that SABs and SAR authors should focus explicitly on what enables and what obstructs the realisation of best practice, and on the choices they make about the stories that are told.