Selection and promotion practices

Mitchell et al., recommend a random selection process as a depersonalizing alternative to hypercompetitive selection methods; however, this method may not only undermine perceptions of an organization’s fairness and justice in selection processes but also further appeal to the grandiose self-esteem of narcissistic leaders as they perceive themselves as chosen by “fate” (Dimaggio et al., Reference Dimaggio, Semerari, Falcone, Nicolo, Carcione and Procacci2002). Although Mitchell et al.’s assessment of shared leadership and leader emergence through realistic job previews aligns with the idea of a shared mental model, this work proposes how shared leadership can be assessed in candidates with limited resources (e.g., time, cost), where realistic job previews may not be feasible. For instance, assessing candidate team-based competencies through structured behavioral interviews is a viable alternative. Examples of competencies centered around an interaction-based shared mental model would include assessing candidates’ past experiences collaborating with employees who have different working styles, engaging in consultation with their employees, such as incorporating employees’ feedback, encouraging a process for setting shared goals (Carnevale et al., Reference Carnevale, Huang and Harms2018), and providing structure and organization for diffusing knowledge (Cooke et al., Reference Cooke, Gorman, Myers and Duran2013).

Training and development practices

Though Mitchell et al., recommend making high-potential training accessible to employees beyond leadership positions, the content domain of the training remains largely unexplored. In order to enhance team performance and a collective team identity, depersonalized training programs should consider training leaders and employees on strategies that facilitate the development of a shared mental model. Research has found that shared mental models have been associated with leader humility, contributing to positive team outcomes like team learning (Li et al., Reference Li, Zhang, Xia and Liu2019). Given that leader narcissism is tied to a lack of consideration of others’ perspectives and self-centeredness (Dimaggio et al., Reference Dimaggio, Semerari, Falcone, Nicolo, Carcione and Procacci2002), certain strategies can help shift away from a self-interested focus toward a shared understanding of the team. In turn, practicing these strategies can indirectly communicate to employees that shared decision-making is valued and encouraged (Carnevale et al., Reference Carnevale, Huang and Harms2018).

One such strategy is training on the process of shared metacognition, defined as the leader’s ability to explain their decision-making process or problem solving through debriefing sessions, think-aloud sessions, or guided reflexivity sessions with employees (Black et al., Reference Black, Soto and Spurlin2016; Delahaij & Van Dam, Reference Delahaij and Van Dam2016; Mohammed et al., Reference Mohammed, Ferzandi and Hamilton2010). These sessions can enhance employee perceptions of transparency in the leader’s decision-making, communicating that the leader places value in informing and consulting with employees (Carnevale et al., Reference Carnevale, Huang and Harms2018). Furthermore, training programs can model effective ways of promoting knowledge sharing, given that knowledge withholding is common among narcissistic, competitive leaders (Strik et al., Reference Strik, Hamstra and Segers2021). Training programs may also focus on modeling and encouraging leaders to share relevant task and contextual information through effective ways of prompting and seeking information and feedback from employees, thereby creating a climate conducive to knowledge sharing. Ultimately, these training interventions can facilitate communication and reflection between the leader and employees, developing shared interdependencies, understanding how to work together and common interpretations of work demands and processes.

Compensation and rewards

Although the focal article discusses the need for team-based recognition and compensation centered around team task performance, this work expands on this perspective by specifying that leaders should be rewarded and recognized for contextual employee and team behaviors, such as mentoring or securing resources for team goals. Recognizing narcissistic leaders for their service behaviors toward employees will likely help reinforce the perceived value of prosocial behaviors, encouraging leaders to continue engaging in them as a means of gaining recognition and approval. Past research has supported that when the motivation from leader narcissism is redirected toward mobilizing team efforts (e.g., collective information search), this yields positive team outcomes (e.g., team creativity; Zhou et al., Reference Zhou, Li, Liu, Tian, Zhang and Qin2019).

In alignment with interaction-based shared mental models, the allocation of merit-based compensation would likely also benefit from factoring in employee ratings that evaluate the leader based on interpersonal competencies. Employee ratings of leaders’ narcissistic rivalry were associated with lower perceived supervisor support, job engagement, and quality in leader–member exchanges (Fehn & Schütz, Reference Fehn and Schütz2021). Followers’ perceptions of leader narcissism were also tied to leader effectiveness or ability to guide toward the attainment of shared goals, through behaviors like supervising others and leading discussions (Liu et al., Reference Liu, Zheng, Li, Yu, Harms and Yang2022). By factoring in employee ratings of leaders’ relational and communication processes, organizations reinforce the importance of shared decision-making, accountability, and collaboration in narcissistic leaders.