In this final installment of my series examining the concerning resurgence of outdated management practices, I want to tackle an alarming trend identified by Forbes: the return of strict, authoritarian—or as some might say, bullying—leadership.
In his March 2025 Forbes article, “Bullying Is Back: How Hard-Line Leadership Is Crushing Morale,” Chris Westfall strongly critiques this troubling revival. Westfall notes how some companies are reverting to fear-based management styles, characterized by rigid hierarchies, intimidation, and heavy-handed leadership.
Why the Shift to Authoritarian Leadership?
Proponents argue these tougher, more directive approaches help to:
- Quickly Boost Productivity: Fear can motivate short-term performance increases.
- Clearly Define Roles and Expectations: Strict hierarchies and clear directives remove ambiguity.
- Assert Strong Leadership: Some leaders feel this demonstrates strength, especially during uncertain economic times.
The Dark Side of Fear-Based Leadership
However, the negative consequences of this authoritarian style are substantial and well-documented:
- Damage to Innovation: Fear stifles creativity, limiting employees’ willingness to share ideas or take risks.
- Declining Employee Engagement: Intimidation damages morale, causing employees to disengage or simply leave.
- Erosion of Trust and Teamwork: Rigid, fear-driven workplaces create environments of suspicion and competition rather than collaboration.
The Neuroscience Behind Fear and Creativity
From a neuroscience perspective, fear activates the brain’s amygdala, triggering a “fight or flight” response. This response significantly reduces activity in the prefrontal cortex—the brain region responsible for creative thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making. Under stress or intimidation, our brains prioritize survival mechanisms, limiting our cognitive resources available for innovative thinking and collaborative problem-solving.
Westfall highlights several real-world examples of organizations experiencing these negative outcomes firsthand. He vividly illustrates that while bullying management might yield quick wins, it consistently undermines the longer-term foundations necessary for sustainable success and innovation.
Real-Life Consequences
Companies adopting these harsh methods have witnessed increased employee anxiety, decreased collaboration, and ultimately, high turnover rates. Talented employees, especially those with creative or innovative skillsets, often leave authoritarian workplaces in search of healthier, more supportive environments.
My Perspective: Short-Term Gains, Long-Term Losses
Here’s what concerns me the most: although a fear-based approach might seem attractive in the short run—particularly during economically stressful times—it inevitably leads to long-term organizational harm. Innovation and engagement don’t flourish in environments ruled by intimidation; rather, they require psychological safety, trust, and genuine collaboration.
In an increasingly competitive, innovation-driven marketplace, organizations relying on outdated authoritarian tactics might soon find themselves falling significantly behind their more progressive competitors.
What regressive trends are you seeing? Is there anything else you’d like me to explore? Let me know—always open to fresh ideas.
