See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/280234575

Corporate psychopathy deviant workplace behaviour and toxic leaders Part

Two

Data  in  Industrial and Commercial Training · July 2015

DOI: 10.1108/ICT-12-2013-0087

CITATION READS

1 150

2 authors, including:

Steven Appelbaum
Concordia University Montreal
158 PUBLICATIONS   4,473 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ffactors that impact the success of an organizational change: a case study analysis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Steven Appelbaum on 21 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Industrial and Commercial Training
Corporate psychopathy: deviant workplace behaviour and toxic leaders (part two)
Henry S. Cheang Steven H. Appelbaum
Article information:
To cite this document:
Henry S. Cheang Steven H. Appelbaum , (2015),"Corporate psychopathy: deviant workplace behaviour and toxic leaders
(part two)", Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 47 Iss 5 pp. 236 - 243
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ICT-12-2013-0087
Downloaded on: 17 June 2015, At: 05:59 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 59 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 14 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

Henry S. Cheang, Steven H. Appelbaum, (2015),"Corporate psychopathy: deviant workplace behaviour and toxic leaders –
part one", Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 47 Iss 4 pp. 165-173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ICT-12-2013-0086

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:149884 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Corporate psychopathy: deviant workplace
behaviour and toxic leaders (part two)
Henry S. Cheang and Steven H. Appelbaum
Dr Henry S. Cheang is based
at the McGill University,
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)
Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Dr Steven H. Appelbaum is
Professor of Management at
the John Molson School of
Business, Concordia
University, Montreal, Quebec,
Canada.
Received 25 December 2013
Revised 25 December 2013
Accepted 26 December 2013
PAGE 236 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING
Abstract
Purpose – Increasingly, it is recognized that (larger) organizations have many employees who present with
corporate psychopathy (i.e. a milder version of anti-social personality disorder). Importantly, such a disorder
contributes to the presence of deviant workplace behavior. Organizations must therefore adapt its practices to
both identify and manage employees who either present with, or have tendencies toward, corporate psychopathy.
As a means of developing a guiding framework for organizational adaptation, this two part paper offers two reviews
of relevant research. The first revolves around the body of knowledge regarding corporate psychopathy and
the primary, established behavioral method of identifying its presence; the second is a brief review on physiological
measures that can complement current gold standards. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
Design/methodology/approach – A range of published empirical and practitioner research articles were
reviewed to first, elaborate on anti-social personality disorder and corporate psychopathy; second, showcase the
efficacy of the currently most accepted method of detecting psychopathic behavior – the Psychopathy Checklist
(PCL); and third, highlight physiological methods of detecting psychopathic tendencies which may complement
usage of the PCL – electroencephalography, measurement of galvanic skin responses, and electromyography.
Findings – First, deviant workplace behaviors cause losses of billions of dollars across all business
organizations, and much of this behavior stems from corporate psychopaths in positions of leadership.
Second, the PCL, while useful, can nonetheless yield sharp differences in the identification of psychopathy
across different administrators of the test. Third, measures of physiological states show good reliability in
discriminating psychopathic persons from non-psychopathic persons. Based on these findings, the authors
propose guidelines for how to identify and mitigate the effects of corporate psychopathy for organizations.
Research limitations/implications – The proposed guidelines must be tested in an empirical paper to
measure their effectiveness.
Practical implications – The paper suggests an overall framework that may help leaders and organizational
development practitioners identify the major factors which may be considered to safeguard against the
potentially detrimental conduct of corporate psychopaths in their organizations.
Social implications – This paper highlights the need to identify and ward against the presence of corporate
psychopaths. There needs to be guidelines for organizations on how to identify and mitigate the effects of
corporate psychopathy for organizations.
Originality/value – The suggestion of integrating physiological methods of detection with the PCL, as well
as urging pro-active education of all employees as the symptoms and effects of corporate psychopathy, is
the novel contribution of the paper.
Keywords Corporate psychopathy, Deviant workplace behaviour, Electroencephalography,
Electromyography, Galvanic skin responses, Psychopathy checklist (PCL)
Paper type Literature review
(POTENTIAL) Measures for detecting corporate psychopathy
The Psychopathy Checklist (PCL)-R
Part 1 of this paper covered deviant behavior, toxic leaders, and corporate psychopathy. Part 2
will deal with (potential) measures for detecting corporate psychopathy, pitfalls, physiological
j VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015, pp. 236-243, © Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 0019-7858 DOI 10.1108/ICT-12-2013-0087
 correlates of psychopathic emotional responses, and how to move forward to correct this
problem plaguing organizations.
Given the long history of ambiguity regarding the finer tenets of psychopathy, it is perhaps
unsurprising that there have been evolving definitions and explanatory models of this condition
(Lykken, 2006; see Fowles and Lindo, 2006 for review). It should therefore be even less surprising
that the test instruments and other potential measures used to detect and diagnose psychopathy
has undergone, and continues to undergo, constant revisions. Additionally, both researchers and
clinicians continually question the full worth of such tests, given the complexity of psychopathy
(that is not to say they deny the utility, rather they question the full usefulness of such measures;
Lilienfeld and Fowler, 2006). Regardless, there is one family of tests that is regarded as the gold
standard for identifying psychopathy, that of the PCL in all its various revisions and its derivatives
by Robert Hare and a succession of many colleagues (PCL, PCL-R, and so on; Hare, 1991, 2003
as cited in Hare and Neumann, 2006).

As its name clearly states, this test is a checklist. Used properly, this tool should either identify or
predict the presence of the manipulative personalities, general affective impairments, impulsivity,
and overall lack of empathy that are manifested in persons presenting with psychopathy.
Although there have been many versions, the overall method and the principles underlying
their construction remain unchanged. A summary of the procedures of the most recent version
(PCL-R, 2003) follows (Hare and Neumann, 2006).

The test proper typically requires 90-120 minutes to administer. It consists of two parts: an
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

interview with the subject and a review of the subject’s file records and history (Hare and
Neumann, 2006). It is then the administrator of the test who answers a 20-item test measuring
psychopathic traits that are indexed along a progressively growing number of personality or
personality-impacted/related dimensions (i.e. with each revision, Hare has added personality
dimensions to the explanatory model as an outgrowth of his continuing factor analyses, Hare and
Neumann, 2006). One of the major areas of strength for this test is that test administrators need
to have high levels of education in psychology or psychology-related fields as well as undergo
a robust and fairly comprehensive amount of training given by Hare and his delegates to be
considered qualified to administer and interpret results along the appropriate personality
dimensions/factors.

For the most recent version, items are graded according to the four factors described in the
second section in the current paper (i.e. The nature of corporate psychopathy). That is, the test
items to map out a given subject’s presentation of the most recently available details indicate
that test items can be categorized according to their presentation of the following features:
glibness, manipulativeness, extreme dishonesty, and grandiosity, which are subsumed under
deficits in the interpersonal domain; lack of empathy, lack of emotion and affect, lack of
remorse, and a failure to accept responsibility, which are categorized as problems in the
emotional domain; lack of planning, stimulus seeking, impulsivity, and irresponsibility in the
lifestyle domain; and finally, aggression, early onset of anti-social behavior, and a (broad)
versatility of crimes in impulsivity/aggressivity domain (note that the finer distinctions among
the above-mentioned details may change slightly across validation studies; however, the
general factor loadings remain intact; Cooke and Michie, 2001; Hare and Neumann, 2006).
Essentially, high scores on all these measures are strongly predictive of psychopathy (Hare,
1994; Hare and Neumann, 2006).

The core strength of the test lies in the extensive validation procedures undertaken by Hare and
colleagues over the span of its development and revisions. To date, over 6,000 inmates have
participated in the validation trials of the instrument (Cooke and Michie, 2001). Validity has been
supported by many statistical analyses across a number of studies factor analysis studies (e.g.
Hart et al., 1990). In broad terms, different groups of prisoners have been successfully
distinguished using the PCL-R, with those psychiatrically judged as having psychoses being
reliably distinguished from those presenting with other problems. Additionally, interrater reliability
is generally quite high (Vitale et al., 2002). Finally, the test-retest reliability has been found to be
high over a five-year time period. This has an impact upon measuring corporate leaders as will be
presented next.

VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING j PAGE 237

 Potential pitfalls of the PCL-R
However, despite comprehensive validation procedures and a history of revisions, the PCL-R is not
without its flaws. At least two key issues stand out. First, there is some question as to the external
validity of the instrument. A review of the literature yields findings indicative of a more restricted
generalizability of this instrument than would be expected of such a well-cited and extensively used
battery. Note, for example, the finding that the dimensional scales of the PCL-R do not hold true for
criminals with substance abuse problems (McDermott et al., 2000). If such a discrepancy can
appear even when used to gauge personality disorders among other known criminals, then it is
eminently possible that the validity of the test results vis-à-vis non-convicted businesspeople
is even lower. In fact, Hare appears to tacitly acknowledge this shortcoming, as he and Babiak
are currently constructing a derivative of the PCL-R called the PCL-BS-360 (PCL-Business Scan
360), a test specifically designed to differentiate between the (psychopathic) personality profiles
of convicted and non-convicted white businesspeople (Cynthia et al., 2013).
A second and perhaps more significant concern surround the internal validity of the work. While
the factors covered by the PCL-R appear to reflect personality domains implicated in
psychopathy, there have been findings that inherent biases of trained administrators of the test
are likely to exert an effect on the interpretation of test results (Boccaccini et al., 2012; Murrie
et al., 2008). This is especially problematic when one considers both the comprehensive
validation of the test and the strict training required to properly administer the test. Hare and
colleagues require administrators to undergo long training sessions prior to acquiring the official
qualification for meaningful administration of the PCL-R (Hare and Neumann, 2006). In theory,
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

this training should remove the impact of personal bias on test results. However, this has not
been the case: It has been shown that administrators on opposite ends of criminal trials can
actually offer divergent diagnoses of defendants’ personality traits (Boccaccini et al., 2012; Murrie
et al., 2008). Relatedly, while good interrater reliability has been found before, some newer
studies are calling this reliability into question (cf. Hill et al., 2004; Campbell, 2006).
These two factors have significant implications. Not only may the tool be less informative than
previously thought, the overall value of the test can be called into question if fully trained test
administrators can nonetheless be influenced by their personal biases or incentives. This is
especially worrisome with respect to corporate psychopaths. Recall that among the reasons for
which corporate psychopaths succeed is that they are capable of circumventing others’
expectations by casually hiding their psychopathic natures until they achieve their true goals
(Boddy, 2010). Unfortunately this may be irreversible as they often occupy key leadership
positions in organizations where it may be too late to take a pre-emptive action to protect the
business. There is some real danger that a test battery for detecting psychopathy, even one
ranked as a gold standard, may be at risk of being subverted if it shows signs of being unreliable
the more easily identifiable forms of psychopathy.
However, it bears mentioning that these divergent results are more recent developments and
are vastly dwarfed by work that presents a much more encouraging picture of the PCL-R and its
variants. Nonetheless, it appears obvious that more accurate identification of this type of
personality disorder can be had, and should require the use of converging tests. Even if issues
of a potentially lower validity of a key metric were not an issue, it is always worthwhile to have
more confirmatory evidence rather than less. As corporate psychopathy appears to be a milder
form of APD, drawing on the literature on other methods of identifying this disorder should serve
the present discussion well.

Physiological correlates of psychopathic (Lack of) emotional responses

Before returning to the discussion of psychopathy, it would be worthwhile to note that there are very
definite patterns of neural, dermal, and muscular responses that mark the experience of, and
reaction to, human emotion in non-disordered humans. These changes in activity can be
respectively measured using electroencephalography (EEG), galvanic skin response (GSR)
sensors, and electromyography (EMG) (Picard et al., 2001; Vyzas and Picard, 1999). EEG has
perhaps the greatest potential. It is a neuroimaging technique that can track neural activity
with exquisite temporal resolution (Luck, 2005); it is this precision that investigators have exploited

PAGE 238 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING j VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015

 to convincingly demonstrate specific patterns of neural activity modulations in response to (or
arising from) changes in emotional state in non-disordered persons. In broadest terms, numerous
studies have associated positive valence with heightened activity from left hemisphere electrode
locations and negative valence with heightened electrical neural activity from right hemisphere
electrode locations (see Coan and Allen, 2004, for a review). By contrast, GSR and EMG show high
rates of nervous system activity in response to highly arousing stimuli (regardless of valence) and
lowered activity in response to low-arousing stimuli. However, despite the differential levels of
informativeness, the three measures can collectively heighten the accuracy of detecting and
identifying emotional responses (Picard et al., 2001; Vyzas and Picard, 1999). Conveniently, these
measures can be easily collected, processed, and analyzed using inexpensive modern computer
technology with relatively low-cost (although highly specialized) sensors.
As to how this may relate to the present discussion, it should be noted that there is a consistent
assertion that persons with anti-social personality traits have difficulties or irregularities detecting
or appreciating emotion and other social states (Hare, 1993; Patrick, 2007). Importantly, these
irregularities appear to be consistently indexed by physiological responses. One might argue that,
by far the most promising research centers on the physiological responses of persons with APD.
It has been found, consistently, that when psychopaths (of varying degrees) are presented
with stimuli that induce consistent emotion responses in typical persons, psychopaths have
lower levels of electrodermal activity, neural responses, and other autonomic reactions than
their non-disordered controls (Arnett, 1997; Herpertz et al., 2001; Raine and Venables, 1987,
1988a, b; Raine et al., 1990).
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

It should be noted that a key advantage of using physiological measures is that they are much
more difficult to deceive than subjective tests reliant on expert judges. For example, while
someone may pretend to be more or less frightened by an aversive stimulus than they are, their
pretense would be uncorrelated with the actual level of electrodermal activity (Bamidis et al.,
2009); a genuine startle response would generate a massive spike in electrical skin activity,
whereas a low response would not. Although a subject may verbally and convincingly lie about
their emotional reaction, their body would betray the truth of their genuine responses. This pattern
holds true for many physiological responses, and a simultaneous collection of these measures
would provide even more confirmatory evidence of one sort of response or the other (Picard et al.,
2001). Therefore, it may be germane to explore using such measures to complement the PCL-R.
It is beyond the scope of the current work to discuss all potential physiological measures of
emotional responses in depth (see instead Tognetti et al., 2009 for a representative example and
explanation). That which is pertinent at present is the measures which are relatively simple and
cost-effective to implement for the purpose of detecting psychopathy. The application of this to
organizations and selection and identification of these behaviors and individuals in leadership
positions is the challenge to move ahead and not be sidetracked as a result of non-investigations
when the facts warrant further exploration.

A proposal for going forward

Perhaps the most logical method to offset the likely limitations inherent in the current gold
standard in detecting psychopathy is to evaluate a combined approach. Specifically, it may be
germane to determine the correlation between PCL-R scores taken from known psychopaths in
concert with recordings of their EEG, GSR, and EMG responses as they are exposed to
emotional stimuli. Converging data patterns from any combination of the above measures should
prove more valuable than using PCL-R in isolation.
Returning to corporate psychopathy, one might argue that our suggestion to complement
a subjective test with a series of physiological measures only addresses one aspect of the
problems that may be caused by such psychopaths. This statement would have merit; the
corporate psychopath, if unchecked, can pose a great financial and organizational danger to any
workplace. Simply presenting a new battery of tests without also presenting some strategies
going forward gives little value. As such, it would be germane, if not altogether necessary to also
take steps to recognize and change deviant behaviors in the workplace (Appelbaum et al., 2007).
Our proposal builds on the foundational work of Babiak and Hare (2006) and Boddy (2011a, b)
and is as follows.

VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING j PAGE 239

 First, it is important to educate all members of an organization of the signs and symptoms of
deviant behaviors and toxic environments in general. Whereas previous authors (Babiak and
Hare, 2006; Boddy, 2011a) advocate for prioritizing increases in the awareness of the primary
decision makers in organizations, we would argue that it is critical to inform all members on this
subject. Certainly, it is important to impress upon the leaders of organizations the need to invest in
the resources (e.g. qualified psychologists, among other personnel, and test batteries) necessary
to detect and diagnose deviant behaviors and psychopathy (corporate or otherwise) (Babiak and
Hare, 2006; Boddy, 2011a, b). However, as corporate psychopaths are considerably more likely
to expose their true natures to subordinates as opposed to persons with authority (Boddy, 2010);
it is important that the more frontline victims of psychopathy be forewarned.
In terms of practical steps, the following general strategy is proposed to organizations:
■ Educate management and all other employees on the nature, presence, and prevalence of
corporate psychopaths in their midst.
■ Have human resource departments be especially vigilant for such employees in selection and
training.
■ Log performance evaluations so as to have a more objective and long-term record of
employee performance (so as to mitigate the influence of charm on the perception of
performance); conduct both quantitative and psychological evaluations.
■ Create friendly atmosphere of trust for employees such that they feel comfortable reporting
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

potential behavioral problems from peers to superiors – in effect, create a more ethical
whistleblower context. Admittedly, this does create the possibility for abuse. However, as long
as safeguards are put in place (e.g. flagging employees does not automatically result in any
drastic action but rather highlights them for further review), such a practice should do more
good than harm.
■ Encourage introspection among employees so that they become aware of their own
weaknesses (e.g. predisposition to acquiescence toward stronger personalities) which may
be exploited by manipulative corporate psychopaths.
A more specific and targeted strategy is to mandatorily and comprehensively assess the
presence of corporate psychopathy, both for candidates to important leadership roles as well as
those already in those positions. Furthermore, this strategy would be at least advisable for
middle-level employees. Essentially, we are advocating such testing be demanded of any
member of organizations with a degree of authority over others. This step could include our
proposed combined measures of PCL-R and physiological responses. This is a realistic
beginning that may avert critical damage as an end result if not considered and acted upon.

Conclusion
We would argue that following the steps we have outlined should help mitigate the impact of
corporate psychopaths on the organization. We recognize that our strategy is a proposal and
requires empirical testing. However, this represents pro-active action, and action which is
necessary. Evidence has been mounting for some time that businesses in general have problems
that lead to staggering financial and at times human losses. Since a significant amount of these
losses can be attributed (at least in part) to the conduct of corporate psychopaths acting as
leaders causing deviant behaviors in their organizations, it becomes increasingly urgent to identify
such persons in organizations. As the current gold standard for detecting corporate
psychopathy, PCL-R, has some potential and serious weaknesses, the adoption of more
objective physiological measures to complement the function of the PCL-R should be evaluated
for efficacy. Overall, adoption of a program to educate employees in general and to implement
truly comprehensive means of psychopathy detection should help offset the deleterious effects of
corporate psychopathy on businesses in general, thereby averting future catastrophes such as
the global financial meltdown (Boddy, 2011a). We would argue that going forward; organizations
literally cannot afford to take no action. If they do not then the outcome and direction may be
backward.

PAGE 240 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING j VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015

 References
Appelbaum, S.H., Iaconi, G.D. and Matousek, A. (2007), “Positive and negative deviant workplace behaviors:
causes, impacts, and solutions”, Corporate Governance, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 586-98.
Arnett, P.A. (1997), “Autonomic responsivity in psychopaths: a critical review and theoretical proposal”,
Clinical Psychology Review, Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 903-36.

Babiak, P. and Hare, R.D. (2006), Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work, Harper Business,
Chicago, IL.
Bamidis, P.D., Frantzidis, C.A., Konstantinidis, E.I., Luneski, A., Lithari, C., Klados, M.A., Bratsas, C.,
Papadelis, C. and Pappas, C. (2009), “An integrated approach to emotion recognition for advanced
emotional intelligence”, Human-Computer Interaction – Ambient, Ubiquitous and Intelligent Interaction,
13th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, San Diego, CA, July 2009.
Boccaccini, M.T., Turner, D.B., Murrie, D.C. and Rufino, K.A. (2012), “Do PCL-R scores from state or defense
experts best predict future misconduct among civilly committed sex offenders?”, Law and Human Behavior,
Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 150-69.
Boddy, C.R. (2005), “The implications for business performance and corporate social responsibility of
corporate psychopaths”, AJBBS, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 30-41.
Boddy, C.R.P. (2010), “Corporate psychopaths and organizational type”, Journal of Public Affairs, Vol. 312
No. 4, pp. 300-12.

Boddy, C.R.P. (2011a), “The corporate psychopaths theory of the global financial crisis”, Journal of Business
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

Ethics, Vol. 102 No. 2, pp. 255-9.

Boddy, C.R.P. (2011b), “Corporate psychopaths, bullying, and unfair supervision in the workplace”, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 100 No. 3, pp. 367-79.

Campbell, T.W. (2006), “The validity of the psychopathy checklist-revised in adversarial proceedings”, Journal
of Forensic Psychology Practice, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 43-53.

Coan, J. and Allen, J.J.B. (2004), “Frontal EEG asymmetry as a moderator and mediator of emotion”,
Biological Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 7-49.

Cooke, D.J. and Michie, C. (2001), “Refining the construct of psychopathy: towards a hierarchical model”,
Psychological Assessment, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 171-88.

Cynthia, M., Hare, R.D., Jones, D.N., Babiak, P. and Neumann, C.S. (2013), “Factor structure
of the B-Scan 360: a measure of corporate psychopathy”, Psychological Assessment, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 288-93.
Fowles, D.C. and Lindo, L. (2006), “A dual deficit model of psychopathy”, in Patrick, C.J. (Ed.), Handbook of
Psychopathy, Guilford, New York, NY, pp. 14-34.

Hare, R.D. (1993), Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us, Guilford Press,
New York, NY.
Hare, R.D. (1994), “Predators: the disturbing world of the psychopaths among us”, Psychology Today,
January/February, pp. 54-6.
Hare, R.D. and Neumann, C.N (2006), “The PCL-R assessment of psychopathy: development, structural
properties, and new directions”, in Patrick, C. (Ed.), Handbook of Psychopathy, Guilford, New York, NY,
pp. 58-88.
Hart, S.D., Forth, A.E. and Hare, R.D. (1990), “Performance of criminal psychopaths on selected
neuropsychological tests”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 99 No. 4, pp. 374-9.

Herpertz, S.C., Werth, U., Lukas, G., Qunaibi, M., Schuerkens, A., Kunert, H. and Freese, R. (2001), “Emotion
in criminal offenders with psychopathy and borderline personality disorder”, Archives of General Psychiatry,
Vol. 58 No. 8, pp. 737-45.
Hill, C.D., Neumann, C.S. and Rogers, R. (2004), “Confirmatory factor analysis of the psychopathy
checklist: screening version in offenders with axis i disorders”, Psychological Assessment, Vol. 16 No. 1,
pp. 90-5.
Lilienfeld, S.O. and Fowler, K.A. (2006), “The self-report assessment of psychopathy: problems, pitfalls, and
promises”, in Patrick, C. (Ed.), Handbook of Psychopathy, Guilford, New York, NY, pp. 107-32.

VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING j PAGE 241

 Luck, S. (2005), An Introduction to the Event-Related Potential Technique, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Lykken, D.T. (2006), “Psychopathic personality: the scope of the problem”, in Patrick, C. (Ed.), Handbook of
Psychopathy, Guilford, New York, NY, pp. 3-13.

McDermott, P.A., Alterman, A.I., Cacciola, J.S., Rutherford, M.J., Newman, J.P. and Mulholland, E.M. (2000),
“Generality of PCL-R factors over prisoners and substance-dependent patients”, Journal of Counselling and
Clinical Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 181-6.
Murrie, D.C., Boccaccini, M.T., Johnson, J.T. and Janke, C. (2008), “Does interrater (dis)agreement on
psychopathy checklist scores in sexually violent predator trials suggest partisan allegiance in forensic
evaluations?”, Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 352-62.
Patrick, C. (2007), “Emotion and psychopathy: startling new insights”, Psychophysiology, Vol. 31 No. 4,
pp. 319-30.
Picard, R.W., Vyzas, E. and Healey, J. (2001), “Toward machine emotional intelligence: analysis of affective
physiological state”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 23 No. 10,
pp. 1175-91.
Raine, A. and Venables, P.H. (1987), “Contingent negative variation, P3 evoked potentials, and antisocial
behavior”, Psychophysiology, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 191-9.
Raine, A. and Venables, P.H. (1988a), “Enhanced P3 evoked potentials and longer recovery times in
psychopaths”, Psychophysiology, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 30-8.
Raine, A. and Venables, P.H. (1988b), “Skin conductance responsivity in psychopaths to orienting, defensive,
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

and consonant-vowel stimuli”, Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 221-5.

Raine, A., Venables, P.H. and Williams, M. (1990), “Relationships between N1, P300, and contingent negative
variation recorded at age 15 and criminal behavior at age 24”, Psychophysiology, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 567-74.
Tognetti, S., Alessandro, C., Bonarini, A. and Matteucci, M. (2009), “Fundamental issues on the recognition of
autonomic patterns produced by visual stimuli”, Proceedings of the International Conference on Affective
Computing and Intelligent Interaction, ACII 2009, IEEE, Amsterdam, September 10-12.
Vitale, J., Smith, S.S., Brinkley, C.A. and Newman, J.P. (2002), “The reliability and validity of the psychopathy
checklist-revised in a sample of female offenders”, Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 202-31.
Vyzas, E. and Picard, R.W. (1999), “Offline and online recognition of emotion expression from physiological
data”, Third International Conference on Autonomous Agents, Seattle, WA, May 1-5.

Further reading
Aasland, M.S., Skogstad, A., Nielsen, M.B. and Einarsen, S. (2010), “The prevalence of destructive leadership
behavior”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 438-52.
Allio, R.J. (2007), “Bad leaders; how they get that way and what to do about them”, Strategy and Leadership,
Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 12-17.
Ambrose, M.L., Seabright, M.A. and Schminke, M. (2002), “Sabotage in the workplace: the role of
organizational injustice”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 89 No. 1, pp. 947-65.
American Psychiatric Association (2000), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR,
APA, Washington, DC.

Babiak, P. (1995), “When psychopaths go to work: a case study of an industrial psychopath”, Applied
Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 171-88.

Board, B.J. and Fritzon, K. (2005), “Disordered personalities at work”, Psychology, Crime and Law, Vol. 11
No. 1, pp. 17-32.

Boddy, C.R.P., Ladyshewsky, R. and Galvin, P. (2010), “Leaders without ethics in global business: corporate
psychopaths”, Journal of Public Affairs, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 121-38.

Clarke, J. (2007), The Pocket Psycho, Random House, Sydney.

Cooke, D.J., Michie, C. and Hart, S.D. (2004), “Cross-national differences in the assessment of psychopathy:
do they reflect variations in raters’ perceptions of symptoms?”, Psychological Assessment, Vol. 16 No. 3,
pp. 335-9.

PAGE 242 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING j VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015

 French, W.L. and Bell, C.H. Jr (1995), Organization Development: Behavorial Science Interventions for
Organization Improvement, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Goldman, A. (2006), “Personality disorders in leaders implications of the DSM-IV-TR in assessing

dysfunctional organizations”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 392-414.

Halal, W.E. (1986), The New Capitalism, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.

Langton, N., Robbins, S.P. and Judge, T.A. (2009), Organizational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies, and
Applications, 5th ed., Pearson-Prentice Hall, Toronto.
Lau, M. (2010), “Struggle for Foxconn girl who wanted to die”, available at: www.scmp.com/article/733389/
struggle-foxconn-girl-who-wanted-die (accessed June 25, 2013).
Limerick, D. and Cunnington, B. (1993), Managing the New Organisation: A Blueprint for Networks and
Strategic Alliances, Business and Professional Publishing, Chatswood.
Lubit, R. (2002), “The long-term organizational impact of destructively narcissistic managers”, Academy of
Management: Perspective, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 127-38.
Morse, G. (2004), “Executive psychopaths”, Harvard Business Review, October, pp. 20-2.
Murphy, K.R. (1993), Honesty in the Workplace, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Pacific Grove, CA.
Newby, J. (2005), “Corporate psychopaths”, available at: www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1360571.htm
(accessed June 25, 2013).
Nica, P. (1994), Managementul Firmei, Condor Publishing House, Chisinau.
Downloaded by Concordia University At 05:59 17 June 2015 (PT)

Pech, R.J and Slade, B.W. (2007), “Organizational sociopaths: rarely challenged, often promoted. Why?”
Society and Business Review, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 254-69.
Raine, A. (1996), “Autonomic nervous system factors underlying disinhibited, anti-social, and violent
behavior”, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 794 No. 1, pp. 46-59.
Robinson, S.L. and Bennett, R.J. (1995), “A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: a multidimensional
scaling study”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 555-72.
Sadri, G. and Lewis, M. (1995), “Combatting absenteeism in the workplace”, Management Research News,
Vol. 18 Nos 1/2, pp. 24-30.
Thomas, J. (1991), “Prosecution of white-collar crime rising”, available at: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/
1991-06-10/news/9102210633_1_white-collar-certified-fraud-examiners-embezzlement (accessed June
25, 2013).

Corresponding author
Dr Steven H. Appelbaum can be contacted at: shappel@jmsb.concordia.ca

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

VOL. 47 NO. 5 2015 j INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL TRAINING j PAGE 243

View publication stats