Destructive Leadership and the Penn State Scandal: A Toxic Triangle Perspective

Abstract

Alderfer's (2013) piece on the Sandusky/Penn State tragedy reminds us that leader-centric analyses, the norm in leadership studies, often miss the mark. Alderfer joins a growing list of writers who increasingly recognize that leadership consists of three key elements in a triangle: leaders, followers, and environments. The Penn State scandal highlights how a conducive environment, typified by centralized power and an absence of checks and balances, coupled with flawed leaders and the actual assistance or quiet submission of certain followers, can lead to disastrous outcomes. As Alderfer observes, leadership is a social, or group, process. Leadership success or failure depends on group results, and group results involve more than just leaders and their characteristics and actions. Yet, over three-quarters of articles in scholarly journals consistently overlook the role of organizational environments and followers (Porter & McLaughlin, 2006), focusing instead on leader traits and behaviors (Kaiser, Hogan, & Craig, 2008; Thoroughgood, Padilla, Hunter, & Tate, 2012).