Journal of Personnel Psychology

Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Political Skill

Hanna A. Genau, Gerhard Blickle, Nora Schütte, and James A. Meurs
Online First Publication, September 14, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000284

CITATION
Genau, H. A., Blickle, G., Schütte, N., & Meurs, J. A. (2021, September 14). Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness: The
Moderating Role of Political Skill. Journal of Personnel Psychology. Advance online publication.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000284
Original Article

Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness

The Moderating Role of Political Skill
Hanna A. Genau1, Gerhard Blickle1, Nora Schütte1, and James A. Meurs2
1
Department of Psychology, University of Bonn, Germany
2
Michael A. Leven School of Management Entrepreneurship and Hospitality, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, USA

Abstract. Research on the effectiveness of Machiavellian leaders has found contradictory results. By linking socioanalytic and trait activation
theory to the Machiavellianism and leadership literature, we argue that political skill may explain these findings by moderating the relation
between Machiavellianism and leadership effectiveness. Using a multisource design and moderated mediation analyses with 153 leaders, 287
subordinates, and 153 superiors, we show that leaders who are both strongly politically skilled and high on Machiavellianism successfully enact
transformational leadership, mediating improved leader effectiveness. However, when leader political skill is low, high Machiavellianism is
negatively associated with (subordinate-rated) transformational leadership, resulting in lower leader effectiveness ratings by superiors. We
discuss these results in light of current research on Machiavellianism in leadership and work contexts.

Keywords: Machiavellianism, political skill, transformational leader behavior, leader effectiveness

Niccolò Machiavelli, an influential political theorist of the
Renaissance, argued that politics is amoral and that ra-
tional politicians could use any means, however unscru-
pulous, to achieve and retain power. Using a set of
statements from Machiavelli’s political theory, Christie
and Geis (1970) created an assessment of individual dif-
ferences in Machiavellianism, and Dahling et al. (2009,
p. 219) defined trait Machiavellianism as the tendency to
“distrust others, engage in amoral manipulation, seek
control over others, and seek status for oneself.” Some
evidence suggests that persons high on Machiavellianism
can be successful at obtaining that higher status (Spurk
et al., 2016).
However, previous research on the impact of Machia-
vellian leaders has found some contradictory results
concerning leadership effectiveness. In a study of 120
outstanding 20th century leaders from business, political,
military, and religious institutions, Bedell et al. (2006)
found that Machiavellianism was positively related to
undesirable leadership outcomes for eight of the 12 cri-
teria. On the other hand, Machiavellians sometimes are
described as charismatic (Deluga, 2001), and Machia-
vellian presidents have had more legislative victories
during their tenure in office (Simonton, 1986).
Our research addresses this inconsistency in leadership
effectiveness, first, by including a key component for how
Machiavellian leaders convert their status- and control-
seeking desires into behaviors positively evaluated by
subordinates and followers at work: work-related social
skill (i.e., political skill). According to socioanalytic theory,
social skill translates goal aspirations into action, and
dispositions toward selfishness, treachery, and deceit can
coexist with high social skill (Hogan & Shelton, 1998).
Second, trait activation theory argues for the importance of
a relevant context (e.g., leadership) to the activation of
competencies like political skill (Tett et al. 2013). By
empirically linking these two theoretical structures to
Machiavellianism, our research offers evidence that strong
political skill allows Machiavellian leaders to engage in
transformational behaviors, resulting in greater effec-
tiveness (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).
Our model (see Figure 1) echoes calls by leadership re-
searchers to further investigate the characteristics and
behaviors related to leader effectiveness (Derue et al.,
2011). Derue et al. postulate transformational leader be-
haviors as a mediator of the effect of leader political skill on
leadership effectiveness, but their model does not include
“dark” leader personality (e.g., Machiavellianism). Our
study not only investigates particular relationships between
each major Derue et al. theme of leader traits, behaviors
(i.e., transformational), and outcomes (i.e., effectiveness),
but also expands the model to include the impact of dark
personality (i.e., Machiavellianism) moderated by political
skill. Consequently, our research additionally follows the
specific call to examine how leader dark traits affect leader
behaviors and outcomes (Furtner et al., 2017). We use
“Machiavellian” to signify individuals high on Machiavel-
lianism, and we argue that strongly politically skilled Ma-
chiavellian leaders engage in greater transformational
leadership, leading to improved leader effectiveness.

© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article Journal of Personnel Psychology
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000284
2 H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness
Theoretical Background
Machiavellians have a strong motivation to lead (Mael
et al., 2001) and to seek out management positions that
allow them to control resources and individuals (Dahling
et al., 2009). Their inherent distrust and cynicism permits
amoral manipulation to achieve goals.
Some prior studies found that subordinates of Machi-
avellian leaders report more abusive supervision (Kiazad
et al., 2010; Wisse & Sleebos, 2016), show more signs of
increased emotional exhaustion and reduced career sat-
isfaction (Volmer et al., 2016), and behave more coun-
terproductively (Belschak et al., 2018). Furthermore, the
positive effect of ethical leadership on subordinates’ en-
gagement and work behavior was lower for highly Ma-
chiavellian leaders (Den Hartog & Belschak, 2012).
On the other hand, when it is advantageous, Machia-
vellians can be cooperative, trustworthy, and adept at
forming coalitions (Hawley, 2003). Moreover, they will
demonstrate ethical behaviors (Schepers, 2003). When the
goal is self-enhancement or impression management,
Machiavellians try to refrain from behaving deceitfully and
destructively by using prosocial interpersonal approaches
(e.g., OCB; Belschak et al., 2015).
However, a willingness to strategically cooperate does
not necessarily coincide with the Machiavellian’s ability to
do so (Jones, 2014), and empirical studies indicate that
Machiavellians tend to describe themselves as impulsive,
careless, and undisciplined (Miller et al., 2017). Thus, for
the Machiavellian, strategic leadership requires refraining
from short-term opportunism by using social skill to ef-
fectively control and lead followers “by counseling, per-
suading, explaining, and suggesting” (Hogan & Shelton,
1998, p. 135).
Socioanalytic theory argues that social skill promotes
the translation of interpersonally directed aspirations into
purposeful and successful action (Hogan & Shelton,
1998). There is widespread evidence establishing a
particular kind of social skill (i.e., political skill) as a
critical workplace social competency (Munyon et al.,
2015). Due to their acute understanding of others and
social interactions, their ability to appear sincere and
trustworthy, and their unmatched behavioral versatility,
Journal of Personnel Psychology
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
Figure 1. Theoretical model of Machiavel-
lianism and leader effectiveness.
politically skilled individuals appropriately frame and
package their behaviors to be well-received by others
(Kranefeld et al., 2020).
Moreover, we contend that a leadership role provides
the context for the activation of transformational
leadership in the politically skilled Machiavellian. The
characteristics of transformational leader behaviors are
articulating an inspiring vision to subordinates, fostering
inspirational motivation in followers, intellectually
challenging the status quo, and providing individualized
consideration to followers (Bass & Avolio, 1995). The
concept of transformational leadership can also include
those leaders with dark personality traits (O’Reilly &
Chatman, 2020).
According to the revised trait activation theory (Tett
et al., 2013), political skill should have greater effects in
contexts that call for individuals to control, manipulate,
and influence others (Smith & Webster, 2017). Recent
research has found that job demands, such as workgroup
leadership (i.e., enterprising demands; Holland, 1997),
behaviorally activate political skill in dark personalities
(Kholin et al., 2020), and we suggest that this has impli-
cations for Machiavellian leaders’ effective use of trans-
formational behaviors.
Various meta-analyses have demonstrated the predic-
tive validity of transformational leadership above and
beyond other leadership styles (e.g., Judge & Piccolo,
2004; Wang et al., 2011). Given the strong desire to
control and influence others to achieve heightened status,
this highly successful leadership style that maintains the
leader’s elevated status should be very appealing to Ma-
chiavellians. Additionally, many other leadership styles
require leaders to treat leadership as an exchange (e.g.,
transactional leadership; Bass, 1985) or submit to follower
needs (e.g., servant leadership; Liden et al., 2008). Such
behaviors are counter to Machiavellian motivations to
engage in unfair social exchange and maintain elevated
status (Dahling et al., 2009). Consequently, we believe
transformational behaviors will be particularly attractive to
Machiavellian leaders.
However, with low political skill, it is likely that Ma-
chiavellian leaders will not be seen as transformational
leaders due to their abusive and unethical behavior,
© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness
resulting in greatly reduced leader effectiveness. However,
a highly politically skilled Machiavellian leader should be
more capable of recognizing the strategic social advantage
of being seen as transformational and implementing such
behaviors. Prior research has found that politically skilled
leaders enact transformational leadership (i.e., Ewen et al.,
2013) and that they foster inspirational motivation in
followers by articulating an inspiring vision (i.e., Wihler
et al., 2016). Additionally, political skill has moderated
relationships both meta-analytically across various out-
comes (e.g., Munyon et al., 2015) and specifically in a
leader context (e.g., Blickle et al., 2013). Therefore, we
argue that highly politically skilled Machiavellian leaders
will display transformational leadership behaviors (see
Figure 1):
Hypothesis 1 (H1): Leader political skill will moderate
the relation between leader Machiavellianism and
leader transformational leader behaviors. If political
skill is low, there will be a negative relation between
Machiavellianism and leader transformational leader
behaviors. If leader political skill is high, there will be
a positive relation between Machiavellianism and
leader transformational leader behaviors.
Politically skilled transformational leaders have been
shown to be more effective. Specifically, prior studies
demonstrate that political skill relates to transformational
leadership, which mediates leadership effectiveness (i.e.,
Blickle et al., 2014; Ewen et al., 2013; Wihler et al., 2016).
Furthermore, leadership situations behaviorally activate
political skill in dark personalities (Kholin et al., 2020),
and highly politically skilled Machiavellians’ career be-
haviors follow long-term career goals (Blickle et al.,
2020).
Therefore, the politically skilled Machiavellian’s trans-
formational leadership should be seen by superiors, since
transformational leader behaviors have meta-analytically
related to team and organization performance (Wang
et al., 2011). Additionally, across many studies, political
skill has associated with various group- and organization-
level criteria, as well as supervisor-rated performance
(Munyon et al., 2015). Furthermore, similar to the present
study, prior research found support for a moderated
mediation model where political skill moderated the re-
lationship between leader traits and behaviors, resulting in
improved leader effectiveness (i.e., Ewen et al., 2014). As a
result, leader effectiveness will be heightened by trans-
formational leadership (Judge & Piccolo, 2004), and
1
This study was not preregistered. The data are available upon reasonable request from the first author.
© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
3
Machiavellianism will have a moderated mediation rela-
tionship with leader effectiveness.
Hypothesis 2 (H2): There will be a first-stage moderated
mediation relation between leader Machiavellianism
and leader effectiveness moderated by leader political
skill and mediated by leader transformational leader
behaviors. At low levels of political skill, there will be a
negative relation between leader Machiavellianism
and leader effectiveness, mediated by leader inability
to display transformational leader behaviors. At high
levels of political skill, there will be a positive relation
between leader Machiavellianism, leader transfor-
mational leader behaviors, and leader effectiveness.
Method
The design and sample of Blickle et al. (2018) offered the
opportunity to test the present study’s hypotheses using
the same data set, without variable overlap (excluding
gender and age). Moreover, as detailed below, a unique-
ness analysis of each paper’s contributions with reference
to the theories used, research questions, constructs, and
theoretical and practical implications supported the
uniqueness of the current study (Kirkman & Chen, 2011).1
Based on the triarchic model of psychopathy (Patrick,
2018; boldness, disinhibition, and meanness) and trait acti-
vation theory, Blickle et al. (2018) investigated the behavioral
activation of predatory psychopathy in managers. The study
found that relevant situational cues, such as prospects for
ascendancy and for increases in income, activate inconsid-
erate behaviors toward subordinates, which, in turn, result in
decreased manager job performance. These effects were
specific to the meanness dimension of psychopathy. Theo-
retically, the research helps to explain the mask of sanity
(Cleckley, 1941) in psychopathic managers: appearing be-
nign, except when situational cues activate predatory be-
havioral tendencies (meanness). Thus, organizations are
well-advised to select managers with low meanness.
The current study, based on socioanalytic, trait activa-
tion, and political skill theories, addresses a different re-
search question: How the inconsistency in Machiavellian
leader effectiveness is explained by the activation of social
competency (i.e., political skill) that results in transfor-
mational leader behaviors? Theoretically, the current
study investigates whether high political skill promotes
Journal of Personnel Psychology
4 H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness
Machiavellian leader effectiveness. Consequently, Ma-
chiavellians could be successful transformational leaders if
they also have excellent political skill.
Six hundred lower- to mid-level managers from a broad
range of industries in Germany were invited by hypothesis-
blind students to be study participants. After completing self-
assessment, targets nominated their superior and at least
two subordinates. All participants received e-mail invitations
with randomly generated codes, preserving confidentiality
and allowing for matching leader, subordinate, and superior
responses. Our procedures adhered to the European Union’s
General Data Protection guidelines (https://eugdpr.org/),
which created a setting for participants to respond candidly
and freely, reducing concerns for range restriction. We re-
ceived complete data from 317 target leaders, 211 superiors,
and 389 subordinates. After eliminating 22 other-raters who
were neither a subordinate nor superior and one set of data
with no target response variation (i.e., respondent provided
identical responses to all Machiavellianism items), our final
sample consisted of unique (nonoverlapping) data from 134
leaders with one superior and two subordinate ratings, and
19 leaders with one superior and one subordinate rating.
Including the respondent who provided identical values for
all responses to Machiavellianism items did not significantly
change the results (see the Electronic Supplementary Ma-
terial [ESM 1]).
This final sample totaled 76 female and 77 male leaders,
with an average age of 42.54 (SD = 10.54) years, with
54.9% having at least a bachelor-level degree. On average,
leaders had 7.80 (SD = 7.84) years of experience in their
position and had 12.00 (SD = 16.69) subordinates. Most
participants worked in manufacturing (n = 35), trade and
service (n = 34), public administrations (n = 34), social
welfare (n = 20), or finance (n = 14); eight leaders each
worked in communication and education. Their mean
hierarchical level in the organization (100 = top level,
0 = bottom level) was 60.41 (SD = 20.20). Due to ex-
cluding leaders who could not obtain other-ratings, there
was a potential for nonresponse. Consequently, we
checked for, but did not find, any significant mean dif-
ferences in Machiavellianism between leaders who ob-
tained superior and subordinate ratings and those who did
not. Finally, we compared all leaders who were part of our
final sample (n = 153) to all leaders who were not (n = 164).
There were no significant differences. In sum, we con-
cluded that nonresponse bias was not a concern.
Measures
Machiavellianism
We used a German adaptation of the Machiavellian Per-
sonality Scale (Dahling et al., 2009; Zettler & Solga, 2013).
Journal of Personnel Psychology
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
Leaders responded to the 5-point scale with 16 items
ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A
sample item is “I would cheat if there was a low chance of
getting caught.” Cronbach’s α was .87.
Political Skill
The cross-culturally validated German version of the
Political Skill Inventory (Ferris et al., 2005; Lvina et al.,
2012) was used. Superiors rated leader political skill on 18
items with a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree)
to 7 (strongly agree). A sample item is “It is easy for this
person to develop good rapport with most people.”
Cronbach’s α was .95.
Transformational Leadership
For transformational leadership, we used the correspond-
ing 20 items of the German adaptation of the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire (Bass & Avolio, 1995; Felfe,
2006). Subordinates evaluated leader transformational
leadership on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5
(frequently, if not always). A sample item is “The person
whom I assess spends time teaching and coaching his or her
employees.” For cases with two subordinate ratings, the
correlation between the first and second raters was r = .37
(p < .001). Therefore, we aggregated the two ratings. Both
ICC (ICC 1, k = 0.37, ICC 1, k = 0.54) and rWG (median
rWG = .93) were in the normal range (Judge & Bono, 2000)
and high enough to justify aggregation (LeBreton & Senter,
2008). Cronbach’s α was .95.
Leader Effectiveness
Leader effectiveness was assessed with a scale used in
various studies (e.g., Ewen et al., 2013). Superiors rated
leader effectiveness in 12 activities (e.g., “leading a group
at work” or “supervising others”) on a 5-point scale
ranging from 1 (much worse than other people in a compa-
rable position) to 5 (much better than other people in a
comparable position). Cronbach’s α was .90.
Control Variables
In the regression analyses, control variables (CVs) in-
cluded age and gender because both have associated with
Machiavellianism and leadership outcomes (e.g., Eagly
et al., 2003; Jonason & Davis, 2018; Ng & Feldman, 2008).
Statistical Analyses
First, we calculated the descriptive statistics, bivariate
correlations, and Cronbach’s α (see Table 1). To test our
hypotheses, we then conducted hierarchical (moderated)
regression analyses and bootstrapping procedures (Muthén
& Muthén, 1998–2012) using SPSS 27 and Mplus 8. To avoid
© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness 5

Table 1. M, SD, Cronbach’s αs, and intercorrelations of study variables

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Gender a
1.50 0.50 —
2 Agea 42.54 10.54 .04 —
a
3 Machiavellianism 2.26 0.56 .36*** .22** (.87)
4 Political skillb 4.94 0.90 .04 .22** .02 (.95)
c
5 Transformational leadership 3.65 0.58 .11 .02 .10 .30*** (.95)
6 Leader effectivenessb 3.76 0.69 .03 .12 .06 .60*** .30*** (.90)
Note. N = 153 target leaders, superiors, and combined subordinate ratings (comprising 283 subordinates in total). Gender: 1 = female and 2 = male. Cronbach’s
α are on the diagonal. aTarget leaders’ self-report ratings. bSuperiors’ ratings. cSubordinates’ ratings. **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Table 2. Moderated mediation models of Machiavellianism × political skill on leader effectiveness via transformational leadership
DV = transformational leader behaviorb DV = leader effectivenessc
Model 1a Model 1b Model 1c Model 2a Model 2b
β p β p β P β p β p
Gendera .06 .451 Gendera .09 .276
Agea .04 .645 Agea .13 .116
a
Machiavellianism .11 .165 .18 .022 .17 .054 Machiavellianisma .03 .713 .09 .302
Political skillc .30 <.001 .33 <.001 .32 <.001
Machiavellianism × political skill .27 .001 .28 .001
Transformational leader behaviorb .30 <.001 .30 <.001
2
R .099 .166 .170 (p < .001) .091 .112 (p = .001)
(p < .001) (p < .001) (p = .001)
F(R2) (df1, df2) 8.26 (2, 150) 9.87 (3, 149) 6.04 (5, 147) 7.49 (2, 150) 4.68 (4, 148)
ΔR 2
.067 .005 .021 (p = .170)
(p = .001) (p = .668)
FΔR2 (df1, df2) 11.90 (1, 149) .40 (2, 147) 1.79 (2, 148)
Note. N = 153 target leaders, superiors, and combined subordinate ratings (comprising 283 subordinates in total). DV = dependent variable. Gender: 1 = female
and 2 = male. All independent variables are z-standardized. aTarget leaders’ self-report ratings. bSubordinates’ ratings. cSuperiors’ rating.

multicollinearity (Dawson, 2014), we z-standardized all
predictors before testing our models.
For H1, we regressed subordinate-rated transformational
leadership behaviors on Machiavellianism and political skill
(Table 2: Model 1a). Next, we entered the interaction term
(Table 2: Model 1b) and, finally, the CVs (Table 2: Model 1c).
Our analysis examined the values of the moderator at which
the slope coefficients would become significantly negative
and positive using the Johnson–Neyman technique in Mplus
(Hayes, 2015a). The critical test statistic for two-way in-
teractions is ±1.96 above and below the mean of the z-
standardized moderator variable (see Table 3). Specifically,
the findings would support H1 if there is a negative slope at
decreasing levels of political skill and a positive slope at
increasing levels of political skill, within the range of ±1.96 z.
We plotted the interaction effect at these two critical points,
following Dawson (2014).
For the first-stage moderated mediation model in H2, we
computed, in addition to the above-described moderation, a
regression analysis, testing transformational leadership in
prediction of leader effectiveness (Table 2: Model 2). Next,
to test if the mediation effect varies across different values
of the moderator, we assessed the index of moderated
mediation (IMM; Hayes, 2015b). Then, we calculated the
conditional indirect effects at the critical points of political
skill in Mplus (both with 95% CIs based on 10,000 boot-
strapped samples; Table 3). Additionally, we conducted all
analyses with CVs.
Finally, we calculated the cumulative probability of
finding significant effects in the regression analyses de-
scribed (i.e., for the interaction effect, Model 1b, c, and the
effect of transformational leader behaviors, Model 2). This
probability estimates how likely a found significant effect
would become equally significant in study replication.
Although it should not be confused with replicability, it
indicates the percentage of cases in which a p-value would
become equally significant in a comparable design. Thus,
we calculated the probability in accordance with Bliese
and Wang (2020) in R using the obtained t-values of our
regression analyses.

© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article Journal of Personnel Psychology
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
6 H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness

Table 3. Regions of significance and indirect effects of Machiavellianism × political skill on leader effectiveness via transformational leadership
Conditional effect (B) of Machiavellianism on Conditional indirect effect (B) of Machiavellianism
transformational leadership at values of on leader effectiveness via transformational
Value of political skill political skill leadership at values of political skill
Without control variables
1.96 0.72 (SE = 0.20, LLCI = 1.09, ULCI = 0.31) 0.22 (SE = 0.09, LLCI = 0.43, ULCI = 0.06)
1.50 0.60 (SE = 0.16, LLCI = 0.90, ULCI = 0.25) 0.18 (SE = 0.08, LLCI = 0.36, ULCI = 0.05)
1.00 0.46 (SE = 0.13, LLCI = 0.69, ULCI = 0.19) 0.14 (SE = 0.06, LLCI = 0.28, ULCI = 0.04)
0.50 0.32 (SE = 0.10, LLCI = 0.51, ULCI = 0.12) .09 (SE = 0.04, LLCI = 0.20, ULCI = 0.03)
0.00 0.18 (SE = 0.08, LLCI = 0.34, ULCI = 0.02) 0.05 (SE = 0.03, LLCI = 0.13, ULCI = 0.01)
0.50 0.04 (SE = 0.09, LLCI = 0.20, ULCI = 0.14) 0.01 (SE = 0.03, LLCI = 0.07, ULCI = 0.04)
1.65 .28 (SE = 0.16, LLCI = 0.01, ULCI = 0.62) 0.08 (SE = 0.06, LLCI = 0.01, ULCI = 0.23)
1.80 .32 (SE = 0.17, LLCI = 0.03, ULCI = 0.68) 0.10 (SE = 0.06, LLCI = 0.01, ULCI = 0.25)
1.96 No observed values
With control variables
1.96 0.72 (SE = 0.22, LLCI = 1.13, ULCI = 0.27) 0.22 (SE = 0.10, LLCI = 0.45, ULCI = 0.06)
1.50 .59 (SE = 0.18, LLCI = 0.93, ULCI = 0.22) 0.18 (SE = 0.08, LLCI = 0.37, ULCI = 0.05)
1.00 0.45 (SE = 0.14, LLCI = 0.73, ULCI = 0.16) 0.14 (SE = 0.06, LLCI = 0.29, ULCI = 0.04)
0.50 .31 (SE = 0.11, LLCI = 0.53, ULCI = 0.09) 0.09 (SE = 0.05, LLCI = 0.21, ULCI = 0.02)
0.00 0.17 (SE = 0.09, LLCI = 0.35, ULCI = .02) 0.05 (SE = 0.03, LLCI = 0.13, ULCI = 0.00)
0.50 0.03 (SE = 0.09, LLCI = 0.20, ULCI = 0.17) 0.01 (SE = 0.03, LLCI = 0.07, ULCI = 0.05)
1.50 0.26 (SE = 0.14, LLCI = 0.01, ULCI = 0.57) 0.08 (SE = 0.05, LLCI = 0.01, ULCI = 0.21)
1.80 0.34 (SE = 0.17, LLCI = 0.05, ULCI = 0.70) 0.10 (SE = 0.06, LLCI = 0.02, ULCI = 0.26)
1.96 No observed values
Note. N = 153 target leaders, superiors, and combined subordinate ratings (comprising 283 subordinates in total). LLCI = lower-level confidence interval; ULCI =
upper-level confidence interval. Effects based on 10,000 bootstrap samples and 95% CIs. Values of the moderator variable at which the slope coefficients
become significantly negative or positive are presented in bold.

Results Using the Johnson–Neyman technique (Hayes, 2015a), we

found that the conditional effect of Machiavellianism on
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics and correlations. transformational leadership was significantly negative at
To assess the uniqueness and distinctiveness of our
superior-rated scales (i.e., political skill and leader effec-
tiveness), we compared a confirmatory general factor and a
confirmatory two-correlated factors model with Mplus
(Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012). The general factor model
had a χ2(df = 405) = 1,623.49. The χ2(df = 404) = 1,290.12
value of the two-correlated factors model substantially
decreased Δχ2(df = 1) = 333.37 (p < .0001). The goodness of
fit indices of the two-factor model (RMSEA = .12, CFI = .73,
TLI = .71, SRMR = .082) were in the normal range (e.g.,
Dahling et al., 2009, Table 5; Parker et al., 1993). All items
positively and significantly (p < .005) loaded on their re-
spective factors, and, with one exception, which was .25, all
other items had factor loadings beyond .50. These results
support the uniqueness and distinctiveness of both scales.
In line with H1, we found a significant Machiavellianism ×
political skill interaction effect on transformational lead- Figure 2. Interaction between Machiavellianism and political skill in
predicting transformational leadership (N = 153 target leaders, 153
ership (Table 2, Model 1b; β = .27, p = .001, ΔR2 = 6.7%).
superiors, and 283 subordinates; low ( 1.5 SD) political skill (b = 0.34,
The cumulative probability of finding significant effects p = .001), medium (0 SD) political skill (b = 0.10, p = .021), and high (1.65
for the interaction was 93.18% (Bliese & Wang, 2020). SD) political skill (b = 0.16, p = .014).

Journal of Personnel Psychology © 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness
all political skill values below 0 SD (with CVs below 0.50
SD) and significantly positive at all political skill values
above 1.65 SD (with CVs above 1.50 SD; Table 3).
The plot of the interaction (Figure 2) shows the form of
the Machiavellianism × political skill interaction at low
(i.e., 1.5 SD), medium (i.e., 0 SD), and high (i.e., 1.65 SD)
levels of political skill. When political skill was low
(z = 1.5), Machiavellianism negatively predicted trans-
formational leader behavior (b = 0.34, p = .001). At
medium political skill (z = 0), Machiavellianism negatively
predicted transformational leader behavior (b = 0.10,
p = .021). When political skill was high (z = 1.65), Machi-
avellianism positively predicted transformational leader
behavior (b = 0.16, p = .014). Including CVs did not sub-
stantially change our results (Table 2: Model 1c).
In line with H2, we found a significant positive effect of
transformational leadership on leader effectiveness (Table 2:
Model 2a; β = .30, p < .001, R2 = 9.1%). The cumulative
probability of finding significant effects was 96.66% (Bliese
& Wang, 2020). Entering CVs did not change our results
(Table 2: Model 2b). The IMM was 0.08, and the 95% CI
excluded zero (SE = 0.04; 95% CI [0.023, 0.172]; with CVs:
IMM = 0.09, SE = 0.04; 95% CI [0.024, 0.177]).
Table 3 displays the results for the conditional indirect
effect of Machiavellianism on leader effectiveness via
transformational leader behavior. In the model without
CVs, when political skill was low (z = 1.5), there was a
negative and significant relation between Machiavellianism
and leader effectiveness (b = 0.18, SE = 0.08, 95% CI
[ 0.356, 0.053]). When political skill was medium (z = 0),
there was a negative and significant relation between
Machiavellianism and leader effectiveness (b = 0.05,
SE = 0.03, 95% CI [ 0.130, 0.008]). When political skill
was high (z = 1.65), there was a positive and significant
relation between Machiavellianism and leader effective-
ness (b = 0.08, SE = 0.06, 95% CI [0.006, 0.229]). In-
cluding CVs did not significantly change the results
(Table 3). For additional post hoc analyses, see ESM 1.
Discussion
This multisource study (target leaders–subordinates–
superiors) shows that leaders with high Machiavellianism
and strong political skill are seen by their subordinates as
displaying transformational leader behavior, which, in
turn, is positively associated with superior-rated leader
effectiveness. Thus, strong political skill promotes Ma-
chiavellian leader effectiveness.
Previous studies show mixed and often negative work
outcomes for Machiavellians (e.g., Kiazad et al., 2010;
Volmer et al., 2016; Wisse & Sleebos, 2016), indicating that,
© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
7
in some cases, Machiavellians are effective leaders. One
reason for the predominantly negative relation with leader
effectiveness is that Machiavellians, like others, often lack
enhanced social capabilities. Based on our results, it seems
that Machiavellians require particularly high political skill to
be effective leaders (Wilson et al., 1998). These leaders
seem to make strategic use of social behaviors, allowing
them to advance their ambitions of influence and secure
limited resources. However, with medium political skill, it is
unlikely that attempts toward transformational behavior are
perceived as prosocial. Machiavellian leaders with medium
or low political skill display reduced transformational be-
haviors, resulting in dramatically reduced effectiveness.
Remarkably, even at medium levels of political skill, we
found a negative relationship between Machiavellianism
and transformational leadership. Furthermore, only the
top 5% of politically skilled leaders (z = 1.65) displayed
increased transformational leadership with increasing
levels of Machiavellianism. Smith and Webster (2017) and
Kholin et al. (2020) found that context can activate po-
litical skill, and we investigated the activating context of a
leadership position. Future research could examine these
relationships in other enterprising work environments,
such as jobs with high demands for bargaining or selling
(Silvester et al., 2020).
Our results contribute to the investigation of Machia-
vellianism’s manifestation in work and leadership con-
texts. Jones (2014) speculated that Machiavellians with
very high social skill penetrate organizations in a long-term
process, for which Blickle et al. (2020) found partial
support. Thus, strong political skill may provide Machia-
vellian leaders with the impulse control in social situations
needed to pursue a long-term goal, while maintaining
ulterior motives. Moreover, although research generally
emphasizes beneficial outcomes for followers of the po-
litically skilled (e.g., teams of subordinates; Ahearn et al.,
2004), some studies found political skill to also mask
deviant workplace behavior, thereby creating a protective
façade for the wrongdoer (Harvey et al., 2014; Treadway
et al., 2013). Transformational leadership may be used by
leaders with similarly malign intent (O’Reilly & Chatman,
2020). Our study supports this suggestion given that
Machiavellian personalities seek selfish goals and engage
in amoral manipulation (Dahling et al., 2009).
Furthermore, dark personalities often exhibit extreme
manifestations of otherwise potentially beneficial strategies.
In this vein, Zettler and Solga (2013) found an inverted U-
shaped relation between Machiavellianism and OCB, such
that medium levels of Machiavellianism were most bene-
ficial. We tested this possibility in additional post hoc an-
alyses but did not find any curvilinear effects. Thus, in our
research, the most effective leaders were those with high
levels of Machiavellianism and strong political skill.
Journal of Personnel Psychology
8 H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness
Strengths and Limitations
Responding to calls by leadership scholars (e.g., Derue
et al., 2011), we investigated a model that specifies pre-
cise relations between leader characteristics (i.e., Machia-
vellianism and political skill), leader behavior (i.e.,
transformational leadership), and leader effectiveness.
Furthermore, using a multisource design, we avoided
common source bias (Podsakoff et al., 2012), and we used
superior-rated political skill rather than self-assessed po-
litical skill. This is an important strength of our study, since
social skill is better perceived by the observer than assessed
by the actor (Hogan & Shelton, 1998), and other-rated
political skill is a stronger indicator of the target’s actual
interpersonal behavior (Meurs et al., 2010).
The conditional indirect effects of Machiavellianism on
leader effectiveness may seem small (see Table 3). However,
there is yet no generally accepted effect size classification for
complex moderated mediation effects (Lachowicz et al.,
2018). Since our measures were cross-sectionally assessed,
causal inferences cannot be made. Also, our study could not
account for leader reputation development and how that
would influence leader effectiveness across time (Van Vugt
et al., 2008). In addition, although we believe transforma-
tional behavior is an important link between leader Machi-
avellianism and effectiveness, it is possible that other leader
behaviors (e.g., charismatic) could also mediate this process
(Wang et al., 2005). Moreover, the results from our sample of
mid- and lower-level leaders cannot speak to senior leader
effectiveness.
Future Research and Practical Implications
Future research should address leader reputation devel-
opment, and how a changing reputation influences effec-
tiveness. Moreover, since strong political skill potentially
conceals underlying manipulative and deceitful tendencies
of Machiavellian individuals, it would be especially useful
for studies to collect both subjective and objective perfor-
mance (Van Vugt et al., 2008).
Finally, Machiavellians pursue careers that give them
the greatest possible opportunities for control and in-
fluence (Dahling et al., 2009; Spurk et al., 2016).
Therefore, organizations should attempt to recognize
those high on Machiavellianism early within their tenure
and discourage them from acting on these tendencies. If
Machiavellians already work in the organization,
strengthening a prosocial climate and leadership train-
ing could be promising approaches. For instance, prior
research suggests that ethical leaders may lessen in-
tentions of Machiavellians to behave unethically (Ruiz-
Palomino & Linuesa-Langreo, 2018).
Journal of Personnel Psychology
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
Conclusion
In line with socioanalytic (Hogan & Shelton, 1998) and
trait activation (Tett et al., 2013) theories, this study found
empirical evidence that Machiavellians tend to be suc-
cessful transformational leaders if they also have excellent
political skill.
Electronic Supplementary Material
The electronic supplementary material is available with
the online version of the article at https://doi.org/
10.1027/1866-5888/a000284
ESM 1. Additional analyses
References
Ahearn, K. K., Ferris, G. R., Hochwarter, W. A., Douglas, C., &
Ammeter, A. P. (2004). Leader political skill and team perfor-
mance. Journal of Management, 30(3), 309–327. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jm.2003.01.004
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expecta-
tions. Free Press.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). MLQ multifactor leadership
questionnaire. Mind Garden.
Bedell, K., Hunter, S., Angie, A., & Vert, A. (2006). A historiometric
examination of Machiavellianism and a new taxonomy of
leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12(4),
50–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190601200404
Belschak, F. D., Den Hartog, D. N., & Kalshoven, K. (2015). Leading
Machiavellians: How to translate Machiavellians’ selfishness
into pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Management, 41(7),
1934–1956. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313484513
Belschak, F. D., Muhammad, R. S., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2018).
Birds of a feather can butt heads: When Machiavellian em-
ployees work with Machiavellian leaders. Journal of Business
Ethics, 151(7), 613–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-
3251-2
Blickle, G., Kane-Frieder, R. E., Oerder, K., Wihler, A., von Below, A.,
Schütte, N., Matanovic, A., Mudlagk, D., Kokudeva, T., & Ferris, G.
R. (2013). Leader behaviors as mediators of the leader char-
acteristics - Follower satisfaction relationship. Group & Orga-
nization Management, 38(5), 601–629. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1059601113503183
Blickle, G., Meurs, J. A., Wihler, A., Ewen, C., & Peiseler, A. K. (2014).
Leader inquisitiveness, political skill, and follower attributions of
leader charisma and effectiveness: Test of a moderated me-
diation model. International Journal of Selection and Assess-
ment, 22(3), 272–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12076
Blickle, G., Kückelhaus, B. P., Kranefeld, I., Schütte, N., Genau, H. A.,
Gansen-Ammann, D.-N., & Wihler, A. (2020). Political skill cam-
ouflages Machiavellianism: Career role performance and orga-
nizational misbehavior at short and long tenure. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 118, 103401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.
2020.103401
Blickle, G., Schütte, N., & Genau, H. A. (2018). Manager psychopathy,
trait activation, and job performance: A multi-source study.
© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(4),
450–461. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1475354
Bliese, P. D., & Wang, M. (2020). Results provide information about
cumulative probabilities of finding significance: Let’s report this
information. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1275–1288. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0149206319886909
Christie, R., & Geis, F. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic
Press.
Cleckley, H. M. (1941). The mask of sanity. Mosby.
Dahling, J. J., Whitaker, B. G., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The devel-
opment and validation of a new Machiavellianism scale.
Journal of Management, 35(2), 219–257. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0149206308318618
Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What,
why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(1),
1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9308-7
Deluga, R. J. (2001). American presidential Machiavellianism. The
Leadership Quarterly, 12(3), 339–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S1048-9843(01)00082-0
Den Hartog, D. N., & Belschak, F. D. (2012). Work engagement and
Machiavellianism in the ethical leadership process. Journal of
Business Ethics, 107(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-
012-1296-4
Derue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N., & Humphrey, S. E. (2011).
Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and
meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Personnel Psychol-
ogy, 64(1), 7–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01201.x
Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Van Engen, M. L. (2003).
Transformational, transactional, and Laissez-Faire leadership
styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 129(4), 569–591. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
2909.129.4.569
Ewen, C., Wihler, A., Blickle, G., Oerder, K., Ellen, B. P., Douglas, C., &
Ferris, G. R. (2013). Further specification of the leader political
skill-leadership effectiveness relationships: Transformational
and transactional leader behavior as mediators. The Leadership
Quarterly, 24(4), 516–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.
03.006
Ewen, C., Wihler, A., Frieder, R. E., Blickle, G., Hogan, R., & Ferris, G.
R. (2014). Leader advancement motive, political skill, leader
behavior, and effectiveness: A moderated mediation extension
of socioanalytic theory. Human Performance, 27(5), 373–392.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2014.956174
Felfe, J. (2006). Validierung einer deutschen Version des “Multi-
factor Leadership Questionnaire” (MLQ form 5× short) von Bass
und Avolio 1995 [Validation of a German version of the Multi-
factor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ form 5× short) by Bass
und Avolio 1995]. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisations-
psychologie, 50(2), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089.
50.2.61
Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W.
A., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., & Frink, D. D. (2005). Devel-
opment and validation of the political skill inventory. Journal
of Management, 31(1), 126–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0149206304271386
Furtner, M. R., Maran, T., & Rauthmann, J. F. (2017). Dark leader-
ship: The role of leaders’ dark triad personality traits. In M. G.
Clark & C. W. Gruber (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology: Vol.
15. Leader development deconstructed (pp. 75–99). Springer
International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
64740-1_4
Harvey, P., Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., Buckless, A., & Pesco-
solido, A. T. (2014). The impact of political skill on employees’
perceptions of ethical leadership. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 21(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1548051813483834
© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
9
Hawley, P. H. (2003). Prosocial and coercive configurations of
resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-
adapted Machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49(3),
279–309. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2003.0013
Hayes, A. F. (2015a). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and
conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach.
Guilford Press.
Hayes, A. F. (2015b). An index and test of linear moderated me-
diation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50(1), 1–22. https://
doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.962683
Hogan, R., & Shelton, D. (1998). A socioanalytic perspective on job
performance. Human Performance, 11(2–3), 129–144. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08959285.1998.9668028
Holland, J. L (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of voca-
tional personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Psycho-
logical Assessment Resources.
Jonason, P. K., & Davis, M. D. (2018). A gender role view of the
Dark Triad traits. Personality and Individual Differences,
125(November 2017), 102–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.
2018.01.004
Jones, D. N. (2014). Predatory personalities as behavioral mimics
and parasites: Mimicy Deception Theory. Perspective on
Psychological Science, 9(4), 445–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1745691614535936
Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality
and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology,
85(5), 751–765. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.751
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and trans-
actional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755–768. https://doi.org/
10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755
Kholin, M., Kückelhaus, B., & Blickle, G. (2020). Why dark per-
sonalities can get ahead: Extending the toxic career model.
Personality and Individual Differences, 156(April 2020), 109792.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109792
Kiazad, K., Restubog, S. L. D., Zagenczyk, T. J., Kiewitz, C., & Tang, R.
L. (2010). In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership
in the relationship between supervisors’ Machiavellianism and
subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior.
Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 512–519. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.06.004
Kirkman, B. L., & Chen, G. (2011). Maximizing your data or data
slicing? Recommendations for managing multiple submis-
sions from the same dataset. Management and Organization
Review, 7(3), 433–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.
2011.00228.x
Kranefeld, I., Blickle, G., & Meurs, J. A. (2020). Political skill at work
and in careers. In: Oxford research encyclopedia of psychology.
Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/
9780190236557.013.747
Lachowicz, M. J., Preacher, K. J., & Kelley, K. (2018). A novel
measure of effect size for mediation analysis. Psychological
Methods, 23(2), 244–261. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000165
LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions
about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organiza-
tional Research Methods, 11(4), 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1094428106296642
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant
leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and
multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161–177.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006
Lvina, E., Johns, G., Treadway, D. C., Blickle, G., Liu, Y., Liu, J., Atay,
S., Zettler, I., Solga, J., Noethen, D., & Ferris, G. R. (2012).
Measure invariance of the political skill inventory (PSI) across
five cultures. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Manage-
ment, 12(2), 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595812439870
Journal of Personnel Psychology
10
Mael, F. A., Waldman, D. A., & Mulqueen, C. (2001). From scientific
work to organizational leadership: Predictors of management
aspiration among technical personnel. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 59(1), 132–148. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2000.
1783
Meurs, J. A., Gallagher, V. C., & Perrewé, P. L. (2010). The role of
political skill in the stressor-outcome relationship: Differential
predictions for self- and other-reports of political skill. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 520–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jvb.2010.01.005
Miller, J. D., Hyatt, C. S., Maples-Keller, J. L., Carter, N. T., & Lynam,
D. R. (2017). Psychopathy and Machiavellianism: A distinction
without a difference? Journal of Personality, 85(4), 439–453.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12251
Munyon, T. P., Summers, J. K., Thompson, K. M., & Ferris, G. R.
(2015). Political skill and work outcomes: A theoretical extension,
meta-analytic investigation, and agenda for the future. Personnel
Psychology, 68(1), 143–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12066
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th
ed.). Muthén & Muthén.
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2008). The relationship of age to ten
dimensions of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology,
93(2), 392–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.392
O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. A. (2020). Transformational leader or
narcissist? How grandiose narcissists can create and destroy
organizations and institutions. California Management Review,
62(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0008125620914989
Parker, J. D. A., Bagby, R. M., & Summerfeldt, L. J. (1993). Con-
firmatory factor analysis of the revised NEO personality in-
ventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(4), 463–466.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(93)90074-D
Patrick, C. J., (Ed.), (2018). Handbook of psychopathy (2nd ed.).
Guilford Press.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012).
Sources of method bias in social science research and rec-
ommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psy-
chology, 63(1), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-
120710-100452
Ruiz-Palomino, P., & Linuesa-Langreo, J. (2018). Implications of
person-situation interactions for Machiavellians’ unethical
tendencies: The buffering role of managerial ethical leadership.
European Management Journal, 36(2), 243–253. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.emj.2018.01.004
Schepers, D. H. (2003). Machiavellianism, profit, and the di-
mensions of ethical judgment: A study of impact. Journal of
Business Ethics, 42(2), 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:
1022552610368
Silvester, J., Wyatt, M., Ellen, B. P., & Ferris, G. R. (2020). Candidate
effects on election outcomes: Political skill, campaign efficacy,
and intentions in a British general election. Applied Psychology:
An International Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12292
Simonton, D. K. (1986). Presidential personality: Biographical use of
the Gough adjective check list. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 51(1), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.
1.149
Smith, M. B., & Webster, B. D. (2017). A moderated mediation model of
Machiavellianism, social undermining, political skill, and supervisor-
rated job performance. Personality and Individual Differences,
104, 453–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.09.010
Spurk, D., Keller, A. C., & Hirschi, A. (2016). Do bad guys get ahead or
fall behind? Relationships of the dark triad of personality with
objective and subjective career success. Social Psychological
and Personality Science, 7(2), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1948550615609735
Tett, R. P, Simonet, D., Walser, B., & Brown, C. (2013). Trait acti-
vation theory. Applications, developments, and implications for
Journal of Personnel Psychology
under the license CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
H. A. Genau et al., Machiavellian Leader Effectiveness
person-workplace fit. In N. D. Christiansen & R. P. Tett (Eds.),
Handbook of personality at work (pp. 71–100). Routledge.
Treadway, D. C., Shaughnessy, B. A., Breland, J. W., Yang, J., &
Reeves, M. (2013). Political skill and the job performance of
bullies. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(3), 273–289.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941311321169
Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2008). Leadership, fol-
lowership, and evolution: Some lessons from the past.
American Psychologist, 63(3), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0003-066X.63.3.182
Volmer, J., Koch, I. K., & Göritz, A. S. (2016). The bright and dark sides
of leaders’ dark triad traits: Effects on subordinates’ career
success and well-being. Personality and Individual Differences,
101(10), 413–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.046
Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2005).
Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship
between transformational leadership and followers’ perfor-
mance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of
Management Journal, 48(3), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.5465/
amj.2005.17407908
Wang, G., Oh, I.-S., Courtright, S. H., & Colbert, A. E. (2011).
Transformational leadership and performance across criteria
and levels: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of research. Group
& Organization Management, 36(2), 223–270. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1059601111401017
Wihler, A., Frieder, R., Blickle, G., Oerder, K., & Schütte, N. (2016).
Political Skill, leadership, and performance: The role of vision
identification and articulation. In E. Vigoda-Gadot & A. Drory
(Eds.), Handbook of organizational politics: Looking back and to
the future (2nd ed., pp. 59–94). Edward Elgar.
Wilson, D., Near, D., & Miller, R. R. (1998). Individual differences in
Machiavellianism as a mix of cooperative and exploitative
strategies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19(3), 203–212.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(98)00011-7
Wisse, B., & Sleebos, E. (2016). When the dark ones gain power:
Perceived position power strengthens the effect of supervisor
Machiavellianism on abusive supervision in work teams. Per-
sonality and Individual Differences, 99(9), 122–126. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.05.019
Zettler, I., & Solga, M. (2013). Not enough of a “dark” trait? Linking
Machiavellianism to job performance. European Journal of
Personality, 27(6), 545–554. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1912
History
Received February 5, 2021
Revision received May 13, 2021
Accepted May 14, 2021
Published online September 14, 2021
Acknowledgments
The authors express their gratitude to Robert Hogan and Andreas
Wihler for their thorough and insightful comments on a previous
draft of this paper and thank Nadine Allard, Theresa Fußhöller, and
Kathrin Gumm for their help in the data collection process.
Funding
Open access publication enabled by Bonn University and State
Library, Germany.
Gerhard Blickle
Institut für Psychologie
Universität Bonn
Kaiser-Karl-Ring 9
53111 Bonn
Germany
gerhard.blickle@uni-bonn.de
© 2021 The Author(s). Distributed as a Hogrefe OpenMind article