In recent years, managerial psychology has increasingly shifted its focus toward the darker aspects of leadership and organizational behavior, moving beyond notions of cooperation and harmony. This shift reflects growing recognition that dark personality traits can alter workplace relationships. Most often, these alterations undermine workplace culture and generate adverse outcomes. Among these traits, the Dark Triad – a constellation of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy – has emerged as a robust predictor of harmful workplace dynamics, including deviance, manipulation and exploitation (O'Boyle et al., 2012; Southard et al., 2015; Uysal et al., 2023). More recently, research has expanded this framework to the Dark Tetrad, which adds everyday sadism, thereby capturing a broader range of destructive behaviors with profound implications for employee well-being and organizational functioning (Book et al., 2016; Del Río et al., 2022). Although these traits are often studied as a collective “dark core” evidence also underscores the unique ways in which each trait shapes workplace behavior and interpersonal dynamics (Babiak et al., 2010; Cima and Raine, 2009; Gruda et al., 2022; Szabo et al., 2023; Vize et al., 2018). In parallel, related constructs such as greed have attracted attention and broadened the “dark core of personality” (Lambie and Haugen, 2019; Zeelenberg and Breugelmans, 2022).Much of this research has concentrated on leaders, who occupy positions of influence and power. Those in these leadership positions who possess one or more dark traits may have far-reaching consequences. Scholars have shown that individuals with dark personalities are disproportionately likely to emerge as leaders (Nevicka et al., 2011; Landay et al., 2019) and that these traits shape leader performance as well as leader–follower relationships, often in damaging ways (Judge et al., 2006; Braun, 2017; LeBreton et al., 2018; Spain et al., 2014). For instance, leaders high in narcissism, Machiavellianism or psychopathy frequently exploit subordinates, drain emotional resources and foster climates of tension, depression and disengagement (Volmer et al., 2016). Complementing this line of work, recent evidence demonstrates that the prevalence (or expression) of dark traits systematically increases with leadership level, suggesting a clear link between leadership ascent and dark personality traits and raising important questions about causality and the role of organizations in curbing destructive tendencies (Diller et al., 2021). Importantly, the risks associated with dark traits often intensify at higher levels of organizational hierarchy. For example, CEO narcissism has been linked to critical firm-level outcomes, including strategic risk-taking, volatility and reduced ethical standards (O'Reilly et al., 2018). Despite substantial progress, significant gaps remain in understanding the full impact of dark traits, particularly with respect to contextual factors such as workplace climate, organizational structure and follower characteristics.Our Special Issue “Heroes or Villains? Advancing the Understanding of Dark Personality Traits in Organizations” seeks to advance theory and research on the expression, consequences and contingencies of dark-side personality traits in organizational settings. Collectively, the seven papers included here examine not only how these traits disrupt work behavior and relationships but also when they may paradoxically yield positive outcomes or elicit mixed reactions. By situating dark traits within broader societal concerns, this issue also speaks directly to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3 on Health and Well-being. Toxic work environments created by dark personalities contribute to stress, burnout and mental health problems among employees, which in turn erode job satisfaction, performance and retention. Through rigorous empirical investigations, the contributions assembled here provide timely insights into how dark personality dynamics unfold across organizational contexts and offer pathways for designing interventions and policies that mitigate their destructive impact.In the first paper, Mercadante et al. (2026) explored why leaders might sometimes evaluate subordinates with dark personality traits positively. Drawing on dual-strategies theory, they show that managers driven by agentic goals – particularly dominance-oriented managers – perceive subordinates with Machiavellian, narcissistic or psychopathic tendencies as helpful in achieving their goals. Across multiple studies involving more than 1,200 participants, the authors show that such subordinates may be perceived as instrumental allies, thereby explaining the persistence of dark personalities in organizational hierarchies. In the second paper, Brownell (2026) examines the effects of dark traits in entrepreneurial contexts, drawing on data from 52 new venture teams. Founder narcissism enhanced team survival through reduced burnout, while founder psychopathy undermined survival prospects. Machiavellianism, meanwhile, shows a U-shaped curvilinear relationship with burnout. By highlighting the context-dependent effects of dark traits in resource-constrained entrepreneurial environments, this work expands the conversation beyond traditional corporate leadership. In the third paper, Oh et al. (2026) examined how leader narcissism affects subordinates' cheating behavior using two three-wave, time-lagged survey studies. Results showed how narcissistic leadership can spur subordinates' cheating behavior under conditions of uncertainty and how job autonomy can facilitate this misconduct, revealing a dark side of narcissistic leadership and job autonomy.In the fourth paper, Diller et al. (2026) investigated the paradoxical reactions that leaders high in Dark Triad traits evoke among followers. Through two experimental studies, they demonstrate that such leaders are simultaneously perceived as both threatening and fascinating, provoking anxiety and even anger, but also a dark allure. While most participants displayed avoidance tendencies, individuals higher in dark traits themselves reported greater approach behaviors. The findings reveal the self-reinforcing dynamics that can sustain destructive leadership despite its apparent costs. In the fifth paper, Rus et al. (2026) explored how fear of power loss from the leader can shape abusive supervision and the role of Machiavellianism, a high striving for power. Across a business scenario experiment involving 365 leaders and an extensive multisource field study with 546 leaders and 1,718 subordinates, they show that leaders who fear losing power are more prone to abusive supervision, with this effect strengthening as leader Machiavellianism increases. This research underscores the importance of situational vulnerabilities in shaping dark trait expression. It suggests that an organizational culture of psychological safety could both reduce power insecurity and mitigate abusive supervision.In the sixth paper, Zhou et al. (2026) investigated the trait of leader greed and its interpersonal consequences across three multiwave studies. Results show that greed does not always harm organizations but can promote employee voice when followers have a strong integrity identity. The underlying mechanism lies in employees' perception that greedy leaders encourage immorality, which interacts with their own identity orientations. This research shifts attention to the nuanced, interactionist nature of greed and reveals conditions under which it can stimulate constructive employee behaviors. In the final paper, Honsová et al. (2026) provide a meta-analytic review of the CEO narcissism literature, synthesizing findings from 124 studies. Results depict that the relationship between narcissism and organizational outcomes varies dramatically by measurement approach: self-reports often show weak or negative effects, third-party ratings suggest small positive associations and unobtrusive measures yield inconsistent results. This work highlights the “measurement trap” in narcissism research and calls for standardized, multimethod approaches to enhance validity and comparability across studies.Together, these contributions reveal both the destructive potential and paradoxical appeal of dark traits in leadership, meaningfully expanding the scope of dark traits in the leadership realm. As the papers uncover the mechanisms and vulnerabilities that can trigger harmful interactional dynamics, our Special Issue highlights how liabilities can turn into assets or vice versa, while critically assessing the methodological foundations of the field. Collectively, they advance a more nuanced and multifaceted understanding of the role of dark traits in organizational life (see Future Advances). They further offer several pathways for policymakers, organizations and their members to design interventions and guidelines that mitigate the destructive impact of dark personalities and, perhaps, elicit positive outcomes. For example, how power (loss), fear, fascination and autonomy can create downward spirals that organizations must overcome through diverse hiring, selection and promotion approaches. In particular, fears (e.g. of uncertainty, of losing power or of a Dark Triad leader) came to the forefront in this Special Issue as an essential dynamic to consider, even though the focus is often on promotion and progression. Organizations can support these situations by fostering psychological safety and reducing anxiety. Furthermore, the research presented in this Special Issue depicts positive spirals among CEO and founder narcissism and leader greed, and employee voice behavior, indicating that a more nuanced approach is required. This suggests that leader narcissism can be an asset in specific contexts when accommodated through policies that provide behavioral guidance to buffer potential downsides.
Diller et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: