Relationship Between Leadership, Personality, and the Dark Triad in Workplace: A Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Characteristics of the Studies
3.2. Description of the Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Study/Author | Typology/Main Objective | Participants | Variables/Instruments | Main Findings | International Banking Institute (JBI) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Kızıloğlu et al., 2024) | Design: Cross-sectional descriptive. Aim: To examine the relationship between dark personality traits and the Big Five personality traits in relation to workaholism. | n = 514 Sexo (w/b): 211/303 Age: >21 years | Workaholism: BWAS Dark triad: Adaptation of Single-Item Narcissism Scale for dark triad. Large Personality Cunco: Single items. | Narcissism (r = 0.28, p < 0.001), Machiavellianism (r = 0.20, p < 0.001), psychopathy (r = 0.024, p < 0.001), sadism (r = 0.20, p < 0.001), spitefulness (β = 0.11, p < 0.05) and neuroticism (r = 0.13, p < 0.01) were positively associated with workaholism. Extroversion (β = −0.19, p < 0.001) and openness (β = −0.16, p < 0.01) were negatively correlated with workaholism. | 7/8 |
(Silvester et al., 2014) | Design: Cross-sectional descriptive. Aim: investigating the personality characteristics of political workers and their relationship to performance appraisals. | n = 1478 Etapa 1: 53 Etapa 2: 240 | Political competences: PPQ Political Skills: PSI Personality: NEO-PI-R Machiavellianism: Machiavellianism IV. | Five key factors were identified in political skills: resilience (18.82% variance explained), politicking (11.68% variance), analytical skills (10.29% variance), representing people (7.91% variance) and relating to others (5.86% variance). Intra-class correlations (ICC) were moderately low (median = 0.12), indicating variability in ratings between politicians and between officials. Multilevel analyses showed adequate fit in both groups (CFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.04). Conscientiousness correlated positively with analytical skills (AS) and representation (RP), and negatively with politicking (PK) (p < 0.05). Neuroticism showed a negative correlation with resilience (RS) and analytical skills (AS) in both self-assessments and evaluations received. Political Ability correlated positively with all skills except politicking (p < 0.05). Conscientiousness and Political Ability positively predicted ratings received on RS, RP and RO, although extroversion was not significant in this respect. Machiavellianism was significantly associated only with the Politicization (PK) factor, while RS, RP and RO ratings were negatively affected by the presence of this trait. | 8/8 |
(Simonet et al., 2018) | Design: Cross-sectional descriptive. Aim: investigating how interactions between dark triad personality traits, in combination with other personality traits, affect leadership performance | Nt = 1070 N1 = 285 Position: Lower-middle managers Sex (M/F): 199/86 N2: 120 Position: Senior managers Sex (M/F): 75/45 Average age: 37.7 years N3: 106 Position: Advanced recruits Average age: 29.8 years N4: 599 | Dark Triad: HDS Big Five: HPI Leadership performance: Likert scale items. | The interaction between trait narcissism and antisocial tendencies showed a negative effect on leadership performance. In samples 1 and 4, leaders with high levels of both traits performed significantly lower (with a value β = −0.02, p < 0.05). The combination of narcissism and histrionic traits (excessive attention seeking) also had a negative impact on performance. In sample 2, leaders with high levels of these traits showed lower performance (β = −0.01, p < 0.05). Emotional stability moderated the effects of narcissism. In sample 1, leaders with high levels of narcissism and low emotional stability (low neuroticism) showed significantly lower performance (β = 0.01, p < 0.05). The strength of the effects of these traits varies by organizational context. In less regulated industries, such as the retail sector, the interactions between the Dark Triad traits and leadership performance were more pronounced. In contrast, in more regulated contexts, such as pharmaceuticals, these effects were not as significant. The combined effects of these traits suggest that leaders with high levels of multiple Dark Triad traits tend to experience greater performance detraction. Interactions were more evident in lower-ranking positions, underscoring that environment and role type significantly influence the effect of these traits. | 8/8 |
(McKee et al., 2017) | Design: Cross-sectional descriptive. Aim: Explore whether followers’ personality characteristics (including Dark Triad and Big Five traits) relate to their preferences for leaders who exhibit certain “dark” behaviors. | n = 167 Age: >18 años Sex (g/b): 85/82 | Dark Triad Personality: SD3 Big Five: BFI Dark leadership behaviors: Hare P-Scan | Psychopathy (r = 0.45, p < 0.01) and neuroticism trended positively with desire for dark leadership behaviors. Agreeableness (r = −0.34, p < 0.01) and conscientiousness (r = −0.36, p < 0.01) showed a significant negative relationship with desire for dark leadership behaviors. The Dark Triad predicted preference for dark leaders over and above factors such as age, gender and employment status (ΔR2 = 0.21, ΔF = 16.32, p < 0.001), confirming the hypothesis that dark traits in followers may influence their dark leadership preferences. The inclusion of Big Five traits in the regression did not contribute significant additional variance (ΔR2 = 0.02, ΔF = 0.96, p = 0.45), suggesting that the Dark Triad captures a key part of the variability in preference for leaders with dark traits, which is not explained by Big Five traits. | 8/8 |
(Grover & Furnham, 2021) | Design: Cross-sectional descriptive. Aim: examine how the situational context (work vs. non-work) influences the expression of dark and general personality traits. | n = 903 Age: 34.2 (average) Sex (g/b): 508/395 | Psychopathy: LSRP Narcissism: NPI-16 Machiavellianism: MPS Big Five: Mini-IPIP | Extraversion (M = 3.61) and responsibility (M = 4.20) were significantly higher in the work group than in the non-work group (p < 0.05). Neuroticism was significantly lower in the work group (M = 3.36) compared to the non-work group (M = 3.53) (p < 0.05). Machiavellianism was significantly lower in the work group (M = 2.85) compared to the non-work group (M = 3.01) (p = 0.002). Females showed significantly higher levels of agreeableness (M = 4.77) than males (M = 4.29) in the work group (p < 0.001). | 8/8 |
(DeShong et al., 2017) | Design: Cross-sectional descriptive. Aim: investigating the relationship between Dark Triad personality traits (psychopathy, narcissism and Machiavellianism) and the Big Five personality dimensions (openness, responsibility, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism) in workers, and how these interactions affect job performance and workplace behavior. | n = 163 Age = 18–54 años Sex (g/b) = 117/46 | Narcissism: FFNI Machiavellianism: MPS Psychopathy: EPA Big Five: NEO-PI-R Organizational Civic Behavior: OCB-C Unethical Behavior: UBS Workplace Deviance: WDS | Males scored significantly higher on Machiavellianism (t(156) = 2.17, p < 0.05) and on the Desire to Control subscale (t(153) = 2.10, p < 0.05), on psychopathy (t(105) = 2.14, p < 0.05) and on DD Psych (t(57.40) = 3.86, p < 0.001) and on the openness to ideas facet (t(155) = 5.48, p < 0.001). Females scored higher on kindness (t(133) = −2.23, p < 0.05) and on the subfactors sincerity (t(152) = −3.00, p < 0.01), altruism (t(153) = −2.03, p < 0.05), and anxiety (t(94.43) = −3.68, p < 0.001) and vulnerability (t(154) = −3.74, p < 0.001). Machiavellianism was negatively correlated with agreeableness (r = −0.49, p < 0.01). At the facet level, significant negative correlations with trustworthiness, sincerity and altruism were observed (r = −0.47 to −0.30, p < 0.01). Dark triad traits showed negative correlations with agreeableness (r = −0.56 for Machiavellianism and r = −0.72 for Psychopathy, both p < 0.01). Machiavellianism correlated negatively with conscientiousness (r = −0.30, p < 0.01) and the diligence and self-discipline subfactors (r = −0.34 and r = −0.26, p < 0.01). | 6/8 |
(Wiens & Walker, 2019) | Design: Cross-sectional descriptive. Aim: Study 1—to investigate the relationships between bright personality traits (as measured by the CPI) and dark personality traits (as measured by the HDS) in a sample of managerial-level employees. Study 2—to extend the findings of Study 1 by examining the relationship between bright personality traits and dark personality traits as assessed by observers (supervisors), rather than relying solely on self-assessments. | N1: 262 N2: 113 Age 1: N/E Age 2: 49.7 years Sex (g/b) 1: 63/205 Sex (g/b) 2: 16/97 | Bright Personality: CPI Dark Personality: HDS Critical Thinking Skill: Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal | Psychopathy correlated negatively with Responsibility (r = −0.21, p < 0.05), empathy (r = −0.20, p < 0.05) and self-control (r = −0.10, p < 0.05, r = −0.10, p < 0.05, r = −0.10, p < 0.05). Machiavellianism correlated negatively with self-control (r = −0.21, p < 0.05), Responsibility (r = −0.19, p < 0.05), empathy (r = −0.30, p < 0.01) and sociability (r = −0.26, p < 0.01). Narcissism correlated negatively with self-control (r = −0.21, p < 0.01), empathy (r = −0.30, p < 0.01), responsibility (r = −0.36, p < 0.01) and sociability (r = −0.15, p < 0.05). Empathy has a significant negative beta coefficient (β) on the trait Excitable (−0.22, p < 0.05). Independence (In): Also shows a negative effect on Cautiousness (−0.15, p < 0.05). Good Impression (Gi): Shows a significant negative effect on Excitable (−0.26, p < 0.05) and Skeptical (−0.13, p < 0.05). Flexibility and Responsibility have a significant negative effect on the trait Boldness (−0.36, p < 0.05 and −0.21, p < 0.05, respectively). Empathy has a significant positive coefficient on the subclinical antisocial trait (0.22, p < 0.05). | 6/8 |
(Harrell et al., 2024) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim: To investigate the relationship between the ‘Dark Core’ of personality, which includes traits such as Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy, and the ‘General Factor of Personality’ (GFP), which represents positive personality traits in a sample of workers. | N1: 1066 N2: 1052 Age 1: 37.36 Age 2: 38.95 Sex (g/b) 1: 652/414 Sex (g/b) 2: 621/431 | Dark Triad: SD3 General Personality Factor: HEXACO-100, IPIP-NEO-120 (sample 2 only) | A statistical analysis showed that the model connecting the personality traits (HEXACO and Dark Triad) fitted well, with a χ2 value (6749) = 25,553.13. This indicates that the model is adequate for the data, although some indicators suggest that it could be improved (CFI = 0.567 and TLI = 0.558 are low). When entering a model representing the General Personality Factor (GFP) and Dark Core, it was found that there was a strong negative relationship between them: −0.93 (p < 0.001). This means that as a person has more dark traits (such as narcissism), they tend to have fewer positive personality traits. In the HEXACO trait analysis, the general component (GFP) was found to explain 31% of the variability in personality traits, while the Dark Triad explains 57% of the variability in its traits. This shows that dark traits have a greater impact on the variability of personalities in this sample. When analyzing another sample (Sample 2), a different model was used and fitted well after changes: χ2 (538) = 4161.636, CFI = 0.858, TLI = 0.833. This means that the model fitted the new data well too. In Sample 2, the factors representing the Dark Core explained up to 85% of the variability in some measures, indicating that the dark traits are consistent and significant in this group as well. The correlations between GFP and Dark Core in Sample 2 range from −0.38 to −0.46. This reinforces the idea that there is a negative relationship between these traits in both samples. Machiavellianism: Negative correlation with Honesty-Humility (r = −0.58). Narcissism: Negative correlation with Agreeableness (r = −0.37). Psychopathy: Negative correlation with Honesty-Humility (r = −0.51). | 7/8 |
(Shi et al., 2024) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim: To investigate the relationship between personality characteristics of supervisors in the context of the hotel industry with envy and abusive supervision. | n = 188 supervisor-subordinate pairs Age: >24 Sex (g/b): 149/88 | Dispositional Supervisor Envy: Lange and Crusius Dispositional Malicious Envy Scale. Supervisor’s episodic envy of subordinate: Cohen-Charash and Mueller scale. Supervisor’s power dependence on subordinate: IteWee et al. Abusive supervision: Tepper scale. Only in study 2: Supervisor narcissism: Narcissism scale by Resick et al. Supervisor’s neuroticism: Sato Neuroticism Scale. | Study 1: A significant positive correlation was found between dispositional envy and episodic envy (r = 0.59, p < 0.001). Dispositional envy was also positively correlated with perceived abusive supervision (r = 0.19, p < 0.01). Forty per cent of the variance in episodic supervisor envy was due to dyad differences. Dispositional envy predicts episodic envy (estimate = 0.49, p < 0.001) and perceived abusive supervision (estimate = 0.12, p < 0.05). No evidence was found that episodic envy mediated between dispositional envy and abusive supervision. Power dependence affects the relationship between dispositional envy and episodic envy, being stronger when dependence is low (estimate = 0.70, p < 0.001). Study 2: Correlations confirmed similar patterns, showing a positive relationship between dispositional envy and episodic envy (estimate = 0.48, p < 0.001) and perceived abusive supervision (estimate = 0.52, p < 0.001). Episodic envy strongly predicts perceived abusive supervision (estimate = 0.93, p < 0.001). Episodic envy fully mediates the relationship between dispositional envy and abusive supervision, supporting mediation. The relationship between dispositional envy and episodic envy is stronger in supervisors with high levels of narcissism (estimate = 0.80, p < 0.001). The relationship between dispositional envy and episodic envy was also found to be stronger in supervisors with high levels of neuroticism (estimate = 1.03, p < 0.001). | 8/8 |
(Schattke & Marion-Jetten, 2022) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim 1: To explore the nomological network of dominance, prestige and leadership in relation to narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy, as well as obsessive compulsive behavior and pro-social behavior (OCB). Study 2: To replicate the nomological network established in Study 1 with a population of leaders, investigate associations with transformational and transactional leadership styles, and test the mediation hypothesis using trajectory analysis. | N1: 151 N2: 361 Age 1: 21–64 Age 2: 40.61 Sex (g/b) 1: 81/64 Sex (g/b) 2: 180/181 | Explicit power motives: DoPL Dark Triad: The Dirty Dozen Scale Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB): CWB Checklist. Constructive Organisational Behavior (OCB): OCB Checklist. Leadership styles: Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Study 2). | Study 1: Dominance was positively correlated with all three dark triad traits (narcissism r = 0.59, p < 0.001; Machiavellianism r = 0.50, p < 0.001; psychopathy r = 0.01). Prestige strongly correlated with narcissism (r = 0.30, p < 0.01) and weakly with Machiavellianism (r = 0.13); it did not correlate with psychopathy. Leadership moderately correlated with narcissism (r = 0.26, p < 0.01). CWB (counterproductive work behavior) positively correlated with dominance (r = 0.266, p < 0.01); unexpectedly, it also correlated with OCB (organizational citizenship behavior) (r = 0.21, p < 0.05). Study 2: The correlations of dominance, prestige, and leadership with the dark triad were similar to those in Study 1. Dominance was positively correlated with transactional leadership (r = 0.42, p < 0.001). Prestige and leadership were more strongly correlated with both leadership styles, with prestige being more strongly correlated with transactional leadership (r = 0.30, p < 0.001). All power motives significantly predicted transformational leadership, with a negative coefficient for dominance and positive ones for prestige and leadership. Transformational leadership significantly predicted both OCB (r = 0.39, p < 0.001) and CWB (r = −0.16, p < 0.05). | 6/8 |
(Furnham & Crump, 2014) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim: Examine which specific facets of the Big Five personality traits are associated with the trait of boldness or narcissism (NPD) in the workplace. | n = 6957 Sex (g/b): 5464/1493 Age: 23–65 años Position: Middle—Senior Manager. | Big five: NEO-PI-R Boldness/Narcissism:HDS | Boldness/Narcissism: Boldness has a negative correlation with Neuroticism (−0.13) and Agreeableness (−0.24); and a positive correlation with Extraversion (0.30), Openness to Experience (0.13), and Conscientiousness (0.21). Agreeableness has a strong negative effect on boldness (β = −0.28, p < 0.001). Extraversion and Conscientiousness have moderate positive effects on boldness (Extraversion β = 0.23, p < 0.001; Conscientiousness β = 0.16, p < 0.001). Demographic variables like gender and age did not influence boldness. The model explains 20% of the variance in boldness (Adj. R2 = 0.20). Neuroticism: Vulnerability (N6) is negatively related to boldness (−0.28), and Hostility (N2) has a positive relationship (0.16). Extraversion: Assertiveness (E3) has a significant positive relationship with boldness (0.27). Agreeableness: Modesty (A5) is strongly negatively related to boldness (−0.37). Conscientiousness: Competence (C1) is positively related to boldness (0.26). | 8/8 |
(Paleczek et al., 2018) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim: Explore how the traits of the Dark Triad, along with the traits of the Big Five, are related to specific variables of job success and job satisfaction. | n = 287 Age: 37.74 Sex (g/b): 150/137 Position: Leaders/Non-leaders | Big Five: NEO-PI-R Narcissism: NPI-R Machiavellianism: MACH-IV Psychopathy: LSRP Objective career success: Annual salary and binary indicator of leadership position (yes/no) Job satisfaction: Fahrenberg’s life satisfaction questionnaire. | The traits of the Dark Triad (narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy) are positively correlated with each other, with a particularly strong association between Machiavellianism and psychopathy (r = 0.63, p < 0.01). Psychopathy showed a high negative correlation with agreeableness (r = −0.65, p < 0.01), which represents the most significant correlation between a dark trait and a positive one. The inclusion of the Dark Triad improved the prediction of salary (ΔR2 = 0.02, p < 0.05) and leadership position (ΔR2 = 0.04, p < 0.05). Narcissism was the only trait that positively predicted both salary (β = 0.16, p < 0.05) and leadership position (Exp(B) = 7.36, p < 0.01). Psychopathy had a negative effect on salary (β = −0.19, p < 0.05), while Machiavellianism had no significant effect on objective career success. Using only the Big Five traits, the model correctly classified 70.8% of participants in terms of whether they had a leadership position. When adding the Dark Triad traits, classification accuracy increased to 74.3%. The personality traits (Big Five and Dark Triad) explained 20% of the variance in job satisfaction, 13% in income satisfaction, 6% in salary, and 13% in leadership position. | 8/8 |
(Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2020) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim: Research how personality (Dark Triad and Big Five) influences adaptive work performance. | n = 613 Age: 18–70 Sex (g/b): 282/331 | Big Five: NEO-FFI Dark Triad: Dark Triad at Work, adapted Adaptive performance: Scale developed by Marques-Quinteiro, adapted | All the Big Five traits showed significant correlations with each other, except for Neuroticism with Openness to Experience (r = 0.04, p = 0.324) and Openness to Experience with Agreeableness (r = 0.06, p = 0.190). Neuroticism showed significant negative associations with Extraversion (r = −0.33, p < 0.001), Agreeableness (r = −0.26, p < 0.001), and Conscientiousness (r = −0.40, p < 0.001). The relationship between Psychopathy and Sadism was high (r = 0.67, p < 0.001), while Narcissism and Machiavellianism showed no significant association (r = 0.02, p = 0.576). Adaptive performance had significant positive associations with Extraversion (r = 0.25, p < 0.001), Openness (r = 0.21, p < 0.001), Agreeableness (r = 0.13, p = 0.002), Conscientiousness (r = −0.30, p < 0.001), and Narcissism (r = 0.16, p < 0.001). Neuroticism (r = −0.29, p < 0.001), Machiavellianism (r = −0.19, p < 0.001), Psychopathy (r = −0.24, p < 0.001), and Sadism (r = −0.17, p < 0.001) showed significant negative correlations with adaptive performance. Socio-demographic variables such as gender, age, and work experience showed no significant associations with adaptive performance. Control variables did not contribute significantly to explaining adaptive performance, with an R2 = 0.003, p = 0.677. When including the Big Five personality traits, 16.0% of the variance in adaptive performance was explained (ΔR2 = 0.159, p < 0.001), with Neuroticism (β = −0.165, p = 0.001), Openness (β = 0.186, p < 0.001), and Conscientiousness (β = 0.208, p < 0.001) being significant predictors. The inclusion of the Dark Tetrad increased the explained variance to 20.2% (ΔR2 = 0.184, p < 0.001), with Neuroticism (β = −0.127, p = 0.010), Openness (β = 0.155, p < 0.001), Conscientiousness (β = 0.164, p < 0.001), Narcissism (β = 0.134, p = 0.002), and Psychopathy (β = −0.147, p = 0.005) as significant predictors. The inclusion of Sadism in the model did not increase the explained variance (ΔR2 = −0.001, p = 0.541). | 8/8 |
(Fernández-del-Río et al., 2020) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim: Explore the incremental validity of dark personality, conceptualized as (low) Honesty-Humility, narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism, in predicting three dimensions of job performance: Task Performance, Organizational Citizenship Behavior, and Counterproductive Work Behavior. | n = 613 Age: 38.78 Sex (g/b): 330/283 | Big Five: NEO-FFI Honesty-Humility: HEXACO-PI-R Dark Tetrad: Dark Tetrad at Work Job Performance: Individual Job Performance (Adapted to Spanish). | The Dark Triad showed negative correlations with agreeableness (average |r| = 0.27). The correlations between Honesty-Humility and the traits of the Dark Tetrad were moderate (average |r| = 0.35). Psychopathy and sadism showed the strongest correlation with each other (r = 0.67, p < 0.001). The dimensions of job performance showed low to moderate correlations with the Dark Tetrad (average |r| = 0.22), with Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) being the most strongly associated (r = 0.26). The inclusion of Honesty-Humility did not increase the explained variance in Task Performance (TP) and Contextual Performance (CP) (ΔR2 = 0.00), but did increase it in CWB (ΔR2 = 0.03, p < 0.001). The incorporation of the Dark Tetrad increased the explained variance in TP (ΔR2 = 0.06, p < 0.001), CP (ΔR2 = 0.11, p < 0.001), and CWB (ΔR2 = 0.04, p < 0.001). The inclusion of sadism increased the explained variance in TP (ΔR2 = 0.01, p = 0.029) and CWB (ΔR2 = 0.01, p = 0.004), but did not increase it in CP. For task performance (specific tasks), the traits that predicted higher scores were: • Conscientiousness (β = 0.37, p < 0.001) • Narcissism (β = 0.23, p < 0.001) • Machiavellianism (β = 0.10, p = 0.025) For contextual performance (behavior in the environment), the positive predictors were: • Openness (β = 0.17, p < 0.001) • Conscientiousness (β = 0.22, p < 0.001) • Narcissism (β = 0.34, p < 0.001) • Machiavellianism had a negative association (β = −0.18, p < 0.001). Regarding CWB, neuroticism (β = 0.12, p = 0.011) and sadism (β = 0.16, p = 0.004) were positively associated, while Honesty-Humility had a negative association (β = −0.13, p = 0.009). | 8/8 |
(Furnham & Treglown, 2021) | Design: Cross-sectional correlational (and descriptive). Aim: Understand how high-potential personality traits and the Dark Triad, along with work engagement, relate to perceptions of job success in participants. | n = 290 Sex (g/b): 109/181 Age: 34.1 | High-potential personality traits: HPTI Inventory Dark Triad: Dirty Dozen Work engagement: UWES Perceived job success: Job success questionnaire | Women scored significantly higher in Conscientiousness (HPTI), Vigor (p = 0.014), and Dedication (p = 0.048) in work engagement. There were no significant gender differences in the Dark Triad traits. Subjective success was significantly and positively correlated with Courage, Conscientiousness, and Tolerance for Ambiguity (HPTI), and with Narcissism (r > 0.60) in the work engagement scales. Curiosity was the only trait in the HPTI that negatively correlated with subjective success. Courage and Psychopathy (positively), and Neuroticism and Tolerance for Ambiguity (negatively) predicted levels of Vigor, explaining 28.9% of the variance. Narcissism was the only significant predictor for Dedication and Absorption, explaining 30.1% and 26.3% of the variance, respectively. Neuroticism (negatively), and Courage and Narcissism (positively) predicted subjective success, explaining 23.8% of the variance. Work engagement, specifically Vigor and Dedication, increased the explanatory power of the model by 25.9%, reaching a total of 52.8%. Work engagement (comprised of Vigor, Dedication, and Absorption) was shown to have a mediating effect on the relationship between Conscientiousness and Narcissism and subjective success (ß indirect for Conscientiousness = 0.12, p < 0.001; ß for Narcissism = 0.26, p < 0.001). The model showed an acceptable fit overall (CFI = 0.97, TLI = 0.95), with some fit indices such as RMSEA indicating a moderate fit. | 7/8 |
References
- Alderotti, G., Rapallini, C., & Traverso, S. (2023). The Big Five personality traits and earnings: A meta-analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 94, 102570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aluja, A., García, L. F., Rossier, J., Ostendorf, F., Glicksohn, J., Oumar, B., Bellaj, T., Ruch, W., Wang, W., Suranyi, Z., Ścigała, D., Čekrlija, Đ., Stivers, A. W., Di Blas, L., Valdivia, M., Ben Jemaa, S., Atitsogbe, K. A., & Hansenne, M. (2022). Dark Triad traits, social position, and personality: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 53(3–4), 380–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunzel, J. (2021). Overconfidence and narcissism among the upper echelons: A systematic literature review. Management Review Quarterly, 71(3), 585–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiorri, C., Garofalo, C., & Velotti, P. (2019). Does the Dark Triad manifest similarly in men and women? Measurement invariance of the dirty dozen across sex. Current Psychology, 38(3), 659–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, A. (2016). Are they among us? A conceptual framework of the relationship between the dark triad personality and counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs). Human Resource Management Review, 26(1), 69–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeShong, H. L., Helle, A. C., Lengel, G. J., Meyer, N., & Mullins-Sweatt, S. N. (2017). Facets of the Dark Triad: Utilizing the Five-Factor Model to describe Machiavellianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 105, 218–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doerfler, S. M., Tajmirriyahi, M., Ickes, W., & Jonason, P. K. (2021). The self-concepts of people with Dark Triad traits tend to be weaker, less clearly defined, and more state-related. Personality and Individual Differences, 180, 110977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duradoni, M., Gursesli, M. C., Martucci, A., Gonzalez Ayarza, I. Y., Colombini, G., & Guazzini, A. (2023). Dark personality traits and counterproductive work behavior: A PRISMA systematic review. Psychological Reports. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellen, B. P., Alexander, K. C., Mackey, J. D., McAllister, C. P., & Carson, J. E. (2021). Portrait of a workplace deviant: A clearer picture of the Big Five and Dark Triad as predictors of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(12), 1950–1961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fatfouta, R. (2019). Facets of narcissism and leadership: A tale of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde? Human Resource Management Review, 29(4), 100669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-del-Río, E., Ramos-Villagrasa, P. J., & Barrada, J. R. (2020). Bad guys perform better? The incremental predictive validity of the Dark Tetrad over Big Five and honesty-humility. Personality and Individual Differences, 154, 109700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Furnham, A., & Crump, J. (2014). A Big Five facet analysis of sub-clinical narcissism: Understanding boldness in terms of well-known personality traits. Personality and Mental Health, 8(3), 209–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Furnham, A., & Treglown, L. (2021). The dark side of high-fliers: The dark triad, high-flier traits, engagement, and subjective success. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 647676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gómez-Leal, R., Gutiérrez-Cobo, M. J., Megías-Robles, A., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2023). The dark triad and subjective well-being: The mediating role of cognitive-emotional regulation strategies. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 64(3), 368–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Grover, S., & Furnham, A. (2021). Personality at home vs. work: Does framing for work increase predictive validity of the Dark Triad on work outcomes? Personality and Individual Differences, 169, 109848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hadziahmetovic, N., & Mujezinovic, M. (2021). The role of the Big Five personality profiles in employee affective commitment and engagement: Case of small and medium enterprises. International Journal of Business and Administrative Studies, 7(2), 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrell, C. E., Burns, G. N., King, M. C., Ridgway, W. B., Vangara, K., Hesson, Z. B., Edkins, V. A., & Morgan, C. A. (2024). Investigating the overlapping concepts of the Dark Core and the general factor of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 225, 112650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howard, M. C., & Van Zandt, E. C. (2020). The discriminant validity of honesty-humility: A meta-analysis of the HEXACO, Big Five, and Dark Triad. Journal of Research in Personality, 87, 103982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hudson, N. W. (2023). Lighten the darkness: Personality interventions targeting agreeableness also reduce participants’ levels of the dark triad. Journal of Personality, 91(4), 901–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jonason, P. K., & Davis, M. D. (2018). A gender role view of the Dark Triad traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 125, 102–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jordan, Z., Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Aromataris, E. (2019). The updated Joanna Briggs institute model of evidence-based healthcare. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 17(1), 58–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Junça-Silva, A., & Silva, D. (2023). The buffering effect of micro-daily events on the relationship between the dark triad traits and counterproductive work behavior. Management Research Review, 46(5), 667–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kariyawasam, J. D., & Welmilla, I. (2020). The impact of Big Five personality factors on employees’ career success: Evidence from a leading apparel firm, in Sri Lanka. SSRN Electronic Journal, 275–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaufman, S. B., Yaden, D. B., Hyde, E., & Tsukayama, E. (2019). The Light vs. Dark Triad of personality: Contrasting two very different profiles of human nature. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaufmann, L. M., Wheeler, M. A., & Sojo, V. E. (2021). Employment precarity strengthens the relationships between the Dark Triad and professional commitment. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 673226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kızıloğlu, M., Kircaburun, K., Özsoy, E., & Griffiths, M. D. (2024). Work addiction and its relation with dark personality traits: A cross-sectional study with private sector employees. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 22(4), 2056–2072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kowalski, C. M., Vernon, P. A., & Schermer, J. A. (2021). The Dark Triad and facets of personality. Current Psychology, 40(11), 5547–5558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K., Ashton, M. C., Wiltshire, J., Bourdage, J. S., Visser, B. A., & Gallucci, A. (2013). Sex, power, and money: Prediction from the Dark Triad and Honesty–Humility. European Journal of Personality, 27(2), 169–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKee, V., Waples, E. P., & Tullis, K. J. (2017). A desire for the Dark Side: An examination of individual personality characteristics and their desire for adverse characteristics in leaders. Organization Management Journal, 14(2), 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLarty, B. D., & Holt, D. T. (2019). A bright side to family firms: How socioemotional wealth importance affects Dark Traits–Job performance relationships. Family Business Review, 32(4), 378–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miao, C., Humphrey, R. H., Qian, S., & Pollack, J. M. (2019). The relationship between emotional intelligence and the dark triad personality traits: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Research in Personality, 78, 189–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moola, S., Munn, Z., Tufanaru, C., Aromataris, E., Sears, K., Sfetcu, R., Currie, M., Lisy, K., Qureshi, R., Mattis, P., & Mu, P.-F. (2020). Chapter 7: Systematic reviews of etiology and risk. In JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Musek, J., & Grum, D. K. (2021). The bright side of personality. Heliyon, 7(3), e06370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nguyen, N., Pascart, S., & Borteyrou, X. (2021). The dark triad personality traits and work behaviors: A person-centered approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 170, 110432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paleczek, D., Bergner, S., & Rybnicek, R. (2018). Predicting career success: Is the dark side of personality worth considering? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 33(6), 437–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palmer, J. C., Komarraju, M., Carter, M. Z., & Karau, S. J. (2017). Angel on one shoulder: Can perceived organizational support moderate the relationship between the Dark Triad traits and counterproductive work behavior? Personality and Individual Differences, 110, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Puthillam, A., Karandikar, S., Kapoor, H., & Parekh, A. (2020). Gratitude blindness: How does the Dark Triad experience gratitude? Personality and Individual Differences, 168, 110309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putro, S. D., & Tirtoprojo, S. (2022). Effect of Big Five Personality and reward on work performance of operational unit employees with job satisfaction as a mediating variable at PT. KAI Daop VI Yogyakarta. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Research, 6(5), 201–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramos-Villagrasa, P. J., Fernández-del-Río, E., & Barrada, J. R. (2020). Does evil prevail? The “Bright” and “Dark” sides of personality as predictors of adaptive performance. Sustainability, 12(2), 474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rico-Bordera, P., Piqueras, J. A., Soto-Sanz, V., Rodríguez-Jiménez, T., Marzo, J.-C., Galán, M., & Pineda, D. (2023). Civic engagement and personality: Associations with the Big Five and the Dark Triad. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(3), 2126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schattke, K., & Marion-Jetten, A. S. (2022). Distinguishing the explicit power motives. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie, 230(4), 290–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, X., Yu, Y., & Shi, H. (2024). Effect of supervisor dispositional envy on episodic envy in supervisor–subordinate dyads: A multilevel investigation of workplace envy and abusive supervision. Tourism Management, 103, 104889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silvester, J., Wyatt, M., & Randall, R. (2014). Politician personality, Machiavellianism, and political skill as predictors of performance ratings in political roles. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(2), 258–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simonet, D. V., Tett, R. P., Foster, J., Angelback, A. I., & Bartlett, J. M. (2018). Dark-side personality trait interactions: Amplifying negative predictions of leadership performance. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 25(2), 233–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Urrútia, G., & Bonfill, X. (2010). PRISMA declaration: A proposal to improve the publication of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Medicina Clinica, 135(11), 507–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiens, T. K., & Walker, L. J. (2019). Examining the relationship between bright and dark personality traits in two management samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 141, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Population | Workers in a Workplace Setting |
---|---|
Intervention | Interaction between Dark Triad traits and the Big Five personality dimensions |
Outcomes | Effects of the interaction between Dark Triad traits and other personality dimensions on job performance. |
Research Question | How are Dark Triad personality traits related to other personality dimensions in workers and leaders, and how do these interactions affect job performance? |
Database | Search Strategy |
---|---|
Pubmed | ((“Work” OR “occupational setting” OR “organization*”) AND (“Dark Triad” OR “narcissis*” OR “Machiavell*” OR “psychopath*”) AND (“Leadership” OR “leadership style*” OR “transformational” OR “authoritarian” OR “democratic” OR “charismatic”) AND (“Personality” OR “Big Five” OR “NEO-PI-3” OR “Neuroticism” OR “Extraversion” OR “Openness” OR “Agreeableness” OR “Conscientiousness”)) |
Web of Science | TS = (“Work” OR “occupational setting” OR “organization*”) AND TS = (“Dark Triad” OR “narcissis*” OR “Machiavell*” OR “psychopath*”) AND TS = (“Leadership” OR “leadership style*” OR “transformational” OR “authoritarian” OR “democratic” OR “charismatic”) AND TS = (“Personality” OR “Big Five” OR “NEO-PI-3” OR “Neuroticism” OR “Extraversion” OR “Openness” OR “Agreeableness” OR “Conscientiousness”) |
Scopus | TITLE-ABS-KEY(“Work” OR “occupational setting” OR “organization*”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(“Dark Triad” OR “narcissis*” OR “Machiavell*” OR “psychopath*”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(“Leadership” OR “leadership style*” OR “transformational” OR “authoritarian” OR “democratic” OR “charismatic”) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(“Personality” OR “Big Five” OR “NEO-PI-3” OR “Neuroticism” OR “Extraversion” OR “Openness” OR “Agreeableness” OR “Conscientiousness”) |
Science Direct | (“Dark Triad” OR “narcissism” OR “Machiavellianism” OR “psychopathy”) AND (“Leadership” OR “transformational” OR “authoritarian”) AND (“Personality traits” OR “NEO-PI-3” OR “Big Five”) AND “workplace” |
Study | JBI | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | Q6 | Q7 | Q8 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Kızıloğlu et al., 2024) | 7/8 | + | + | + | + | - | + | + | + |
(Silvester et al., 2014) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(Simonet et al., 2018) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(McKee et al., 2017) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(Grover & Furnham, 2021) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(DeShong et al., 2017) | 6/8 | + | + | + | + | - | - | + | + |
(Wiens & Walker, 2019) | 6/8 | + | + | + | + | - | - | + | + |
(Harrell et al., 2024) | 7/8 | + | + | + | + | + | - | + | + |
(Shi et al., 2024) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(Schattke & Marion-Jetten, 2022) | 6/8 | + | + | + | + | - | - | + | + |
(Furnham & Crump, 2014) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(Paleczek et al., 2018) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(Ramos-Villagrasa et al., 2020) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(Fernández-del-Río et al., 2020) | 8/8 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
(Furnham & Treglown, 2021) | 7/8 | + | + | + | + | + | - | + | + |
Aspect | Description |
---|---|
Antecedents | Previous literature has established that Dark Triad traits influence workplace dynamics, often associating them with negative behaviors such as manipulation, low empathy, and leadership difficulties. However, some studies suggest potential strategic advantages in competitive environments. |
Current Findings | Our systematic review supports previous research by confirming that Dark Triad traits are significantly associated with workplace outcomes, including job performance, leadership effectiveness, and interpersonal relationships. However, the findings also highlight that these effects are not uniform across all contexts. Factors such as organizational structure, regulatory environments, and emotional stability appear to moderate the influence of these traits. |
Trends | The findings suggest the need to improve HR evaluation tools, such as psychometric tests, to identify Dark Triad traits during the hiring process. Additionally, implementing emotional intelligence and conflict management training programs is important to reduce negative behaviors. Promoting ethical leadership and creating clear organizational policies are essential to mitigate the effects of these traits. It is also recommended to provide psychological support to affected employees and conduct continuous monitoring to assess the impact of interventions. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Bueno-de la Fuente, C.; Núñez-Rodríguez, S.; de la Fuente-Anuncibay, R.; González-Bernal, J.J. Relationship Between Leadership, Personality, and the Dark Triad in Workplace: A Systematic Review. Behav. Sci. 2025, 15, 297. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030297
Bueno-de la Fuente C, Núñez-Rodríguez S, de la Fuente-Anuncibay R, González-Bernal JJ. Relationship Between Leadership, Personality, and the Dark Triad in Workplace: A Systematic Review. Behavioral Sciences. 2025; 15(3):297. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030297
Chicago/Turabian StyleBueno-de la Fuente, Carla, Sandra Núñez-Rodríguez, Raquel de la Fuente-Anuncibay, and Jerónimo J. González-Bernal. 2025. "Relationship Between Leadership, Personality, and the Dark Triad in Workplace: A Systematic Review" Behavioral Sciences 15, no. 3: 297. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030297
APA StyleBueno-de la Fuente, C., Núñez-Rodríguez, S., de la Fuente-Anuncibay, R., & González-Bernal, J. J. (2025). Relationship Between Leadership, Personality, and the Dark Triad in Workplace: A Systematic Review. Behavioral Sciences, 15(3), 297. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15030297