What’s the Difference Between a Tough Boss and a Toxic One? (Full Q&A)

Leadership is a balancing act. Without setting goals and measuring results, employees can underperform. However, excessive criticism and micromanagement tend to backfire and cause even worse problems.

So, is there a perfect medium? b. spoke with Teresa A. Daniel, JD, PhD, the dean of human resource leadership programs at Sullivan University. She’s also the author of the new book Toxic Leaders and Tough Bosses: Organizational Guardrails to Keep High Performers on Track.

b.: You write that toxic workplaces have driven 20% of U.S. employees out of their jobs within the past five years. How are companies responding to this?

Daniel: Smart companies demand that all employees are treated with respect and that employee well-being is a top priority. They have read the research and understand that productivity and profitability go hand in hand with organizational cultures where trust is high and respect is a given. In those types of positive climates, toxic leaders simply cannot thrive.

b.: While sexual harassment and racial discrimination in the workplace have led to a great deal of employment litigation, do you think a hostile work environment absent these elements is a growing aspect of employment law? 

Daniel: Often a toxic work environment includes either discrimination or harassment, or both, so those are typically the types of situations about which employees file claims. Many companies do not have any policies that govern a lack of respect or bullying. … As a result, employees do not think they will have any real recourse if they are working within a hostile environment that is abusive or disrespectful if harassment and/or discrimination is not involved — and they are probably right …

Unfortunately, there are no legal protections that protect employees from bad bosses (other than some limited state or municipal protections) so I do not predict any movement like #MeToo to happen anytime soon with respect to toxic leaders. You have to remember that it took more than three decades of having legal protections against sexual harassment in place for the public sentiment about harassment to really gain any traction — yet we still have many complaints of sexual harassment filed both internally within our organizations as well as with the government.

All that said, I remain optimistic that businesses will take note of the voluminous research out there that suggests that positive workplace climates, where leaders and managers treat people with respect and do not reward bad behavior, will help to attract the talent that is much needed to help an organization meet its productivity, efficiency, and profitability goals.

b.: How has the increase in working from home since COVID affected toxic leadership behavior? Do toxic leaders require face-to-face contact?

Daniel: I think if someone wants to be disrespectful or abusive to a subordinate, they can do so either in person or virtually, whether that is by phone or video. People who are toxic do not lack for creative ways to be abusive. … There is research in the healthcare industry that suggests that bullying increased by about 10% during the pandemic years.

b.: Can you describe the difference between a toxic leader vs. a tough boss, and what makes the latter desirable? 

Daniel: A toxic leader is someone who is self-interested, lacks concern about their subordinates, has low emotional intelligence, and focuses on short-term results at any cost. By contrast, a tough boss cares about their people, spends a lot of time/energy working toward the development of their subordinates, has high emotional intelligence, and is “tough but fair” while working hard to achieve results.

Tough bosses have high standards for both themselves and others and generally create a positive workplace culture that allows people to thrive, while toxic leaders are generally focused on their next promotion, don’t care about their people, and create a negative workplace that often results in a climate of fear.

b.: Is it possible for such a toxic personality to turn themselves around or are their intrinsic issues too deeply ingrained?

Daniel: I remain hopeful that some toxic leaders can be salvaged. Their strength is that they do get results, but mostly at the expense of their people. I think if they … are told they must either change or be fired, they might be able to make the adjustments needed to turn things around, but only with some sustained executive coaching and direct feedback.

But that will only happen if they clearly understand that it’s “flip or fly” time — meaning, that they are going to have to change or exit their organization because the organization has made it clear that it will no longer tolerate it, despite otherwise positive results.

b.: What’s the wrong way to respond to a toxic leader?

Daniel: The absolute wrong way to handle toxic leaders is to continue to allow them to get away with it. Most everyone in the organization knows who the problem leaders are. Theirs are the units that have high turnover, low morale, greater absenteeism, and more litigation.

Accountability is key. Toxic leaders simply cannot thrive in an organization that truly values its people. Its senior leaders will not allow it to persist and they will not reward those leaders who operate abusively.

b.: Does an imbalance of women in senior leadership promote toxicity in the workplace? Also, do toxic female leaders engage in different types of behavior than their toxic male counterparts?

Daniel: Toxic leaders tend to engage in similar behaviors, regardless of gender. When a workplace is imbalanced, there is more of a tendency for people to imitate the bad behaviors that they see. 

When there are both women and men in senior positions, there is more potential for both types of leadership styles to be imitated. There is a lot of research out there that confirms that organizations with more female leaders perform better on multiple dimensions.

b.: How do HR practitioners end up as “toxin handlers”? What kind of emotional toll does this take on them? 

Daniel: HR practitioners often suffer from compassion fatigue due to their frequent role as a counselor to employees. They often end up being pulled in multiple directions due to their role as both advocate for employees and as the voice of management, which can be exhausting. The duality of the role can (and often does) result in stress, anxiety, and other very real problems such as depression and drug or alcohol addiction.

We need to shift from a results-at-any-cost mindset to one that values empathy, respect, and decency. It is not just “nice to do,” but it is a business imperative. Businesses that take this approach are more profitable and successful.

We can only hope that employers will make the need to train supervisors, managers, and leaders a top priority and that they will hold them to a high standard. It is in everyone’s best interest that they do.

Toxic Leaders and Tough Bosses is available now.

This article appeared in the b. Newsletter. Subscribe now!